Transaction costs detailed: single‐industry studies and operationalization

Abstract

PurposeThis paper aims to present an in‐depth review on the latest state of empirical research in transaction cost economics (TCE), focusing on single‐industry studies. The intensely discussed subject of operationalization of transaction costs is critically assessed, and a concept of how to increase the quality of findings in empirical studies is presented.Design/methodology/approachThe sample was obtained by a literature research and review in high‐class media and submitted to in‐depth quantitative and qualitative analysis such as content analysis.FindingsThe findings are in part unexpected and substantially contribute to research: applicability of TCE to a broad range of industries is found, the majority being large industries with important markets. Most studies support TCE statements, some suggesting theory extension by complementary aspects. Operationalization of transaction costs remains a field requiring further research.Research limitations/implicationsFirst, this article is condensed and therefore limited to single‐industry studies within TCE, understanding “industry” as a specialized field of activity. The question of industry boundaries may be a base for future research. Second, the subject of operationalization of transaction costs still requires further research.Practical implicationsDecision makers can continue to use TCE for various applications such as strategic alliance, vertical integration, governance choice, make‐or‐buy or contract choice questions. A shortcoming in most articles reviewed is the presentation of the industry's characteristics. Authors need to consider them in order to increase the qualitative level of single‐industry studies.Originality/valueThis paper provides significant insight into the field of single‐industry TCE studies. As a result of penetrating research in high‐class media and in‐depth analysis, the paper provides highly structured and intensely examined statements on existing literature and related findings, which support TCE statements and will lead current disputes in the literature to a further stage.

Telecommunications services market in the light of the Agency Theory and the Transaction Cost Theory under New Institutional Economics: case for Poland

“…e transaction cost theory is used in a variety of research elds, e.g. to describe the relationship between the provider and user, de ne the limits of the company's operations, analyse the structure of company's operations and to achieve various other objectives (Mueller, Aust, 2011). In spite of this, however, there are many researchers questioning this approach, criticising -among others -the insu cient operationalisation of this concept (Fischer, 1977).…”

“…In spite of this, however, there are many researchers questioning this approach, criticising -among others -the insu cient operationalisation of this concept (Fischer, 1977). As a consequence, there is no standard approach to the measures of transaction costs since every researcher adapts this category to their own needs (Mueller, Aust, 2011).…”

Choice of foreign licensees: information and communication technology firms

“…strength of IPRs protection), the level of economic freedom and the level of IC technological readiness of a licensee's country, and familiarity between partners through prior licensing agreements relate to transaction costs of licensing. Müller and Aust (2011) argue that decision makers can continue to use transaction cost considerations for various applications such as strategic alliance, vertical integration, governance choice, make-or-buy or contract choice questions. The results of this analysis support their arguments.…”

Ciências sociais aplicadas: contextualizando e compreendendo as necessidades sociais

“…O tema economia dos custos de transação (ECT) tem se destacado nas últimas décadas. Publicações sob este enfoque, em especial de abordagem teórica, consideram a ECT uma contribuição significativa para se compreender a natureza de uma transação (Ghertman & Quélin, 1995, Langniss & Praetorius, 2006, Sorrell, 2007, Aggarwal & Walden, 2009, Durakoglu, 2011, Müller, Aust, 2011 (Snail & Robinson, 1998, Ratnasingham, 1999, Alvarez-Suescun, 2010, Cheng, Lee & Shomali, 2012, Montgomery, 2013, Cao & Lumineau, 2015, Huo, Ye & Zhao, 2016.…”