Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T04:32:13.693Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Market and Nonmarket Strategies During Deregulation: The Case of British Telecom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jean-Philippe Bonardi
Jean-Philippe Bonardi*
Affiliation:
Tulane University
*
Tulane University—A.B. Freeman School of Business, New Orleans, LA 70118–5669, USA. Tel: (504) 862–8378; Fax: (504) 865–6751; E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

From the 1970s to the 1990s, British Telecom (BT), the main telecommunications operator in Britain, underwent a dramatic revolution. The former public administration, often considered inefficient and hardly innovative, became a private company, and now aims to become one of the most dynamic giant telecom players, delivering everything from simple voice calls to advanced eCommerce services all over the world. These changes in the market arena were accompanied by some wide changes in the nonmarket arena, i.e. the institutional and regulatory environment of the British telecom market. This case study analyzes the changes in these two arenas to understand how market and nonmarket strategies may be combined by British Telecom to generate a competitive advantage in a deregulated environment.

Type
Research Article
Information
Business and Politics , Volume 1 , Issue 2 , August 1999 , pp. 203 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © V.K. Aggarwal 1999 and published under exclusive license to Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arlandis, Jacques. 1994. Universal Service: Evolution of a Key Concept. Communications and Strategy 13 (First Quarter): 35–60.Google Scholar
Baron, David P., 1993. Business and its Environment. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Baron, David P. 1997. Integrated Strategy, Trade Policy, and Global Competition. California Management Review 39 (2): 145–169.Google Scholar
Bishop, M. R. and Kay, J. A. 1989. Privatization in the United Kingdom: Lessons from Experience. World Development 643–657.Google Scholar
Boddewyn, Jean and Brewer, Thomas L. 1994. International-Business Political Behavior: New Theoritical Directions. Academy of Management Journal 19 (1): 193–214.Google Scholar
Bonardi, Jean-Philippe and Quélin, Bertrand V. 1998. Regulatory Body, Rent-seeking and Market Activities: the Case of Telecommunications in Europe. In The Limits of Government, edited by Eliasson, Gunnar and Karlson, , Chapter V: 133–180. Stockholm: University of the City Press.Google Scholar
Brunnen, David J. 1989. Developing an Enterprise Culture at British Telecom. Long Range Planning 22 (2): 27–36.Google Scholar
Calingert, Michael. 1993. Government-Business Relations in the European Community. California Management Review Winter: 118–133.Google Scholar
Cave, Martin. 1994. Competition in Telecommunications: Lessons from the British Experience. Communications and Strategy 13 (First Quarter): 61–78.Google Scholar
Cave, Martin and Williamson, Peter. 1996. Entry, Competition and Regulation in the UK Telecommunications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 12 (4): 100–121.Google Scholar
Cawson, A., Morgan, K., Webber, D., Holmes, P. and Stevens, A. 1990. Hostile Brothers: Competition and Closure in the European Electronics Industry. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Dowling, Michael J., Boulton, W. R. and Elliott, S. W. 1994. Strategies for Change in the Service Sector: The Global Telecommunications Industry. California Management Review Spring: 57–88.Google Scholar
Ergas, Henry and Paterson, P. 1991. International Telecommunications Settlement Arrangements. Telecommunications Policy February: 29–48.Google Scholar
Fransman, Martin. 1994. AT&T, BT, and NTT: Vision, Strategy, Corporate Competence, Path-Dependence, and the Role of R&D. In Global Telecommunications Strategies and Technological Changes, Chapter 14. London: Pogorel.Google Scholar
Gillick, David. 1991. Telecommunications Policy in the UK. Telecommunications Policy February: 3–9.Google Scholar
Gist, Peter. 1990. The Role of Oftel. Telecommunications Policy February: 26–51.Google Scholar
Grant, Wyn. 1987. Business and Politics in Britain. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Hillman, Amy and Keim, Gerald. 1995. International Variation in the Business-Government Interface: Institutional and Organizational Considerations. Academy of Management Journal 20 (1): 193–214.Google Scholar
Levy, Brian and Pablo Spiller, T. 1994. The Institutional Foundations of Regulatory Commitments: A Comparative Analysis of Telecommunications Regulation. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 10 (2): 201–246.Google Scholar
Mahon, John F., and Edwin Murray, A. 1981. Strategic Planning for Regulated Companies. Strategic Management Journal 2: 251–262.Google Scholar
Majone, Giandomenico. 1996. Regulating Europe. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Marcus, Alfred A. 1984. The Adversary Economy. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
Miller, Allan N. 1995. British Privatization: Evaluating the Results. The Columbia Journal of World Business Winter: 82–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morley, W. B. 1986. The Privatization of British Telecom—Its Impact on Management. Long Range Planning 19 (6): 124–129.Google Scholar
Morse, Robert G. 1995. European Union Mobile Telecommunications Policy and the Communications Act of 1934: Can Congress Avoid a Collision on the Information Superhighway? George Washington Journal of International Law and Economics 29: 197–258.Google Scholar
Noam, Eli. 1992. Telecommunications in Europe. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
OECD. 1997. Perspectives in Telecommunications: The Advantages of Competition, Volumes 1 and 2. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
OECD. 1995. Telecommunications Infrastructures. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Pospischil, Rudolph. 1993. Reorganization of European Telecommunications. Telecommunications Policy November: 603–621.Google Scholar
Prahalad, C. K. and Hamel, Gary. 1990. The Core Competence of the Corporation. Harvard Business Review May-June: 79–91.Google Scholar
Ring, Peter S., Lenway, Stefanie A. and Govekar, M. 1990. Management of the Political Imperative in International Business. Strategic Management Journal 11: 141–151.Google Scholar
Rudd, David. 1988. Regulating the BT Giant. Telecommunications Policy December: 318–322.Google Scholar
Schneider, Volker, Dang Nguyen, Godefroy and Werle, Raymund. 1994. Corporate Actor Networks in European Policy-Making: Harmonizing Telecommunications Policy. Journal of Common Market Studies 32 (4): 503–520.Google Scholar
Spiller, Pablo T. and Vogelsang, Ingo. 1997. The Institutional Foundations of Regulatory Commitment in the UK: The Case of Telecommunications. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 153 (4): 607–629.Google Scholar
Stehmann, Oliver. 1995. Network Competition for European Telecommunications. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vickers, John and Yarrow, George. 1988. Regulation of Privatized Firms in Britain. European Economic Review 32: 465–472.Google Scholar
Vietor, Richard H. K. 1994. Contrived Competition: Regulation and Deregulation in America. Boston, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Waverman, L., Sirel, and E. 1997. European Telecommunications Markets on the Verge of Full Liberalization. Journal of Economic Perspectives 11 (4): 113–126.Google Scholar
Yoffie, David. 1988. How an Industry builds Political Advantage. Harvard Business Review May-June: 82–89.Google Scholar