Why disintermediation through e-commerce failed to materialize as predicted

Disintermediation

Why has disintermediation through e-commerce not occurred to the extent some authors predicted? Do you think disintermediation will be more common in the future?"

Word limit (excluding List of References):

Number of words:

The concept of disintermediation or the consolidation of supply chains, distribution channels and service chains due to the impact of disruptive technologies, including the Web, served as a powerful catalyst of business model creation in the past and the re-aligning of industries today (Ellis, 2003, 8). Many economic factors favoured disintermediation. These factors including the concept of utilitarian-based levels of pricing access, immediate price and availability for a given product being available globally on a 24/7 basis, and the flattening of distribution channels due to the anticipated pervasive adoption of the Web as the new selling engine global business (Shunk, Carter, Hovis, Talwar, 2007, 248). Disintermediation in fact never did reach the level of business model disruption that many had predicted, because the user experience online and trust were more critical to consumers than price, availability or transaction-based approaches to selling online. The failure of disintermediation to materialize shows that consumers value trust over transactions. This fundamental point underscores also the value distribution channels deliver, as value-added resellers, distributors, dealers and channel partners are the trusted advisors to their long-standing customers. Trust, paradoxically, proved to be a much more potent disintermediation force when it did not exist in value chains and distribution networks than the pure economic efficiency of transactions ever was. The intent of this analysis is to evaluate how the high technology industry illustrates disintermediation, the lessons learned from within that industry with regard to the factors of selective disintermediation, and also explore the dichotomy of disintermediation and value creation. The final section is on why disintermediation failed to live up to the hype.

2. How the High Technology Industry Illustrates Disintermediation

Financial analysts, industry experts, and many executives in high technology often cited Dell Computer Corporation as the lead in disintermediation-based strategies due to their financial success selling through direct channels (Mills, Camek, 2004, 714). It is ironic that during the period of time many industry analysts, experts and authored predicted disruptive and rapid disintermediation of the PC industry. This became such an industry concern that Compaq and Gateway (now both sold to HP and Acer respectively) initiated their own online initiatives and eventually failed at them. Compaq, who tried selling PCs online, created a firestorm literally overnight with this strategy. It was a complete failure. Gateway, who was Dell's largest competitor in the home PC market, chose to invest not only entirely in direct selling to consumers over the Web, they also created a direct sales force into businesses, and invested heavily in their own line of stores through the U.S. And Europe (Shunk, Carter, Hovis, Talwar, 2007, 248). It is interesting to note that the beginning of the series of decisions that eventually led to both Compaq and Gateway losing market share and trust of their customer base was when they chose to believe in disintermediation and took action on it. Paradoxically appealing to the economic judgment of their customers they neglected to invest heavily in building trust instead, and failed as a result.

2.1.

Lessons from the Selective Disintermediation of High Technology Industries

The lessons learned from disintermediation in the high technology industry underscore that each member of the supply chain, distribution channels, service chains and value chains play a critical role in delivering not just the product but also the experience a customer expects. Assuming disruptive disintermediation as valid can only be proven when there are trust "deficits" or negative forces at work in a value chain. As any business cannot tolerate that lack of trust anywhere it how it sources, buys, creates, sells or services products or services, whatever source of distrust is removed quickly to not harm operations. For the dire disintermediation forecasts of the mid-1990s to be true during the massive run-up of Internet dot coms, there would have had to be rampant distrust throughout value chains. The levels of distrust would have been so acute that it was more efficient for a manufacturer to go directly to the consumer and save the costs of ensuring compliance to order requirements, payment levels and customer service levels (Datta, Chatterjee, 2008, 26).

Instead, the Internet proved to be a very disruptive force in supply chains, delivering much greater insight and intelligence into how suppliers, buyers, manufacturers, distribution channel partners, and service providers could work more efficiently with one another. A critical lesson learned is that disintermediation does not revolve around consumer transactions; it does revolve around synchronization of supply chain partners, demand management from distribution channels, and greater accuracy to customer expectations.

3.

The Dichotomy of Disintermediation and Value Creation

One of the primary factors that many financial analysts, industry analysts and authors defined as the primary criterion for disintermediation was the accuracy, speed and cost reduction that online selling direct to customers would bring (Andonova, 2003, 285). The reasoning was that from a purely economically driven standpoint, consumers would have a nearly utilitarian level of access to all pricing, availability, product feature comparison and product review content, encompassing both products and services (Clemons, Hitt, Gu, Thatcher, Weber, 2002, 85). The thought process was that retailers offered little in the way of this new utilitarian vision of transactions online, and did not account for much of an influence on transactions, especially those that are for commodity-class products (Shunk, Carter, Hovis, Talwar, 2007, 248). The assumption that minimized the value of retailers in multi-tier, multichannel selling networks proved to be erroneous and ironically showed how critical the aspects of creating long-term trust and relationships with customers were (Palmatier, Dant, Grewal, Evans, 2006, 1).

Why Disintermediation Failed to Live Up to the Hype

Before discussing the reasons why disintermediation failed to live up to the hype associated with it, there are exceptions that need to be taken into account. The first is in those industries that have undifferentiated supply chains and where price and availability alone are the only differentiators, disintermediation often takes hold. Such is the case with the Indian tea market, and many sectors of the consumer electronics industries that sell on a commodity-based strategy. These are the industries most susceptible to disintermediation as the middle tier of the distribution channels don't deliver that much value-add to the sale of a product that competes just on price or being in stock or not (Dutta, Sarmah, Goyal, 2010, 531). A second area where disintermediation also occurs is in the area of services where the Internet can provide the replacement of advisor, yet the brand supporting this initiate must have earned credibility and trust to be seen as viable to consumers (McCubbrey, Taylor, 2005, et.al.). Disintermediation of the travel industry has become pervasive due to online brands becoming more trusted and seen as more convenient on a 24/7 basis compared to travel agents (Law, 2009, 770). The disintermediation of travel agents has at its basis the convenience factors, supplanted and strengthened with trust in the brands themselves. With these areas of disintermediation in mind, the factors that led to disintermediation overall failing to completely reorder and disrupt supply chains are next analysed.

4.1.

Trust and the Selling Process

The more complex the user's needs are, the more challenging the products or services are to create, the greater the need for having a trusted advisor present in defining how to create viable and stable solutions to these problems. Examples of these types of needs are found in the aerospace and defence industry, where the development, specifying and manufacturing of products is often highly customized to specific needs (Rossetti, Choi, 2008, 507). This approach to manufacturing is often called engineer-to-order, and leads to a product being produced that is unlike any other in the world. Extreme examples of this including the landing gear on a spacecraft or the shielding for the U.S. Space Shuttle. These products require an incredibly complex supply chain that is often governed by specific compliance requirements to military standard specifications as well (Rossetti, Choi, 2008, 507). In this type of supply chain scenario, trust wins over price or availability, and expertise is crucial for the success of the program. The disintermediation of the aerospace and defense industry certainly is happening in the less differentiated and commodity-based products yet will never influence the more complex engineer-to-order areas where trust and expertise is as important as the product itself (Rossetti, Choi, 2008, et.al.). The concept of the trusted advisor, which has been discussed so much by professional services firms globally as part of their unique value proposition, has merit as a defense against commoditization and disintermediation. The greatest value any supplier can provide is knowledge and expertise of how to interpret customers' problems and develop workable solutions. When customers have this level of expectation from a supplier, manufacturer or service provider, this need for expertise is an impenetrable defense against disintermediation. This is where the entire argument of en masse disintermediation in the technology industry fell apart, as many industry analysts incorrectly characterized the entire industry as one that is centered on price and availability -- missing the trusted advisor roles so critical for configuring high-end servers, workstation and entire networks (Smith, Manna, 2004, 376). No Chief Information Officer (CIO) will ever buy a massive, expensive company network entirely online. That need for expertise that connotes trust was far more powerful than many of the industry analysts, authors and pundits had predicted. Trust now dominates the selling process, so much so that every social network has a series of metrics for evaluating the trustworthiness of anyone offering products or services online (Bernoff, Li, 2008, 38, 39). The need for trust will always win over the economics of disintermediation, especially in very complex, expensive and mission-critical systems and components, which are commonplace in the aerospace and defense industry (Rossetti, Choi, 2008, 507).

4.2.

Revenue Follows Knowledge and Accuracy Not Transaction Brokers

The travel industry learned the hard way that expertise, knowledge, insight and personal service is what customers want instead of a transaction agent. If one were to join a group of businessmen on a transatlantic flight from the UK to the U.S. during the mid-1990s the talk would inevitably turn to the bartering, cajoling and at times use of formal authority to get the flight they needed to arrive in time to get a decent amount of sleep before their meetings (McCubbrey, Taylor, 2005, et.al.). Travel agents had become the gatekeepers for the most desirable flights and hotels, the anointed ones who could deliver hotel rooms under special discounts in four-star hotels at two star prices, and could make a traveling executive's life heaven or hell on the road (Law, 2009, 772). The travel agent had become an extension of the travel companies they represented and had lost sight of the customer. A revolution was brewing and the business travellers globally had been long overdue to exercise the power of purchasing to choose alternatives to the gatekeepers in their companies who routed them through impossible travel itineraries to save only a fraction of the fare. The fallacy of looking at the travel industry as disintermediating the travel agent completely misses this point; the real revolution was one of trust and customer experience (McCubbrey, Taylor, 2005, et.al.). When Expedia emerged and other online travel agencies did giving the customer the freedom to define their own itineraries and create entire travel schedules below the cost of travel agendas, a revolution was on (McCubbrey, Taylor, 2005, et.al.). Now this is not an economic revolution, it is a customer service one. There is a big difference. The fact that travel agents were so quickly disintermediated is a sad mile marker in the history of electronic commerce. It should be remembered as the moment when customers chose to use disintermediation as a means to wrestle control over their travel schedules again and remove travel agents who delivered little value. The bottom line of this example is that disintermediation happens when companies revert to controlling their customers through transactions rather than serving them with knowledge and expertise. Disintermediation had become a weapon of change in the hands of customers, and Expedia and other start-ups were happy to equip them with the electronic commerce tools they needed to gain their freedom.

5.

Conclusion

Disintermediation was often talked about in the 1995 -- 2000 timeframe much like someone would talk about an impeding thunderstorm or blizzard. Ironically, the full extent of disintermediation never did happen and entire business models were built that was predicated on the reduced role of suppliers, channel partners, dealers, distributors and services organizations. In fact, disintermediation was more often used as a means for consumers to gain greater control of their own purchasing and experiences. The fact that disintermediation completely missed the value of authenticity, transparency, trust and accentuating a positive customer experience doomed it to fail over the long-term both as an industry dynamic and the basis of business models. The key lesson learned that trust is what pervades the growth of businesses and customer experiences are critical. These intangible aspects of a business cannot be engineering or designed; they must be part of the fabric of a business. Disintermediation lost that point and proved to be more hype than harm to many industries.

List of References

Articles

Veneta Andonova. 2003. ONLINE DISINTERMEDIATION: Differences in the Behavior of Traditional Retailers in Adopting E-Commerce. Management Research 1, no. 3, (October 1): 279-290.

Bernoff, J., and C. Li. 2008. Harnessing the Power of the Oh-So-Social Web. MIT Sloan Management Review 49, no. 3, (April 1): 36-42.

Bull, C.. 2010. Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system, intermediation and disintermediation: The case of INSG. International Journal of Information Management 30, no. 1, (February 1): 94.

Eric K. Clemons, Lorin M. Hitt, Bin Gu, Matt E. Thatcher, and Bruce W. Weber. 2002. Impacts of e-commerce and enhanced information endowments on financial services: A quantitative analysis of transparency, differential pricing, and disintermediation. Journal of Financial Services Research 22, no. 1,2, (August 1): 73-90.

Datta, P., and S. Chatterjee. 2008. The economics and psychology of consumer trust in intermediaries in electronic markets: the EM-Trust Framework. European Journal of Information Systems 17, no. 1, (February 1): 12-28.

Dutta, S., S. Sarmah, and S. Goyal. 2010. Evolutionary stability of auction and supply chain contracting: An analysis based on disintermediation in the Indian tea supply chains. European Journal of Operational Research 207, no. 1, (November 16): 531.

Ellis, C.. 2003. Lessons from online groceries. MIT Sloan Management Review 44, no. 2, (January 1): 8-8.

Rob Law. 2009. Disintermediation of hotel reservations: The perception of different groups of online buyers in Hong Kong. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 21, no. 6, (September 20): 766-772.

Ronald W. Mandersheid. 2005. Information Technology Can Drive Transformation. Public Manager 33, no. 3, (January 1): 3-6+.

Donald J. McCubbrey, and Richard G. Taylor. 2005. Disintermediation and Reintermediation in the U.S. Air Travel Distribution Industry: A Delphi Reprise. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 15,, (January 1): 1.

John F. Mills, and Vojta Camek. 2004. The risks, threats and opportunities of disintermediation: A distributor's view. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 34, no. 9, (October 20): 714-727.

Robert W. Palmatier, Rajiv P. Dant, Dhruv Grewal, and Kenneth R. Evans. 2006. Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of Relationship Marketing: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Marketing 70, no. 4, (October 1): 1.

Ramsey, E., P. Ibbotson, and P. Mccole. 2008. The mitigating effects of uncertainty on 'e' innovation propensity: some service sector evidence. The Service Industries Journal 28, no. 1, (January 1): 53.

Rossetti, C., and T. Choi. 2008. Supply Management Under High Goal Incongruence: An Empirical Examination of Disintermediation in the Aerospace Supply Chain. Decision Sciences 39, no. 3, (August 1): 507.

Jennifer Rowley. 2002. Synergy and strategy in e-business. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 20, no. 4/5, (January 1): 215-222.

Dan L. Shunk, Joseph R. Carter, John Hovis, and Aditya Talwar. 2007. Electronics industry drivers of intermediation and disintermediation. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 37, no. 3, (March 15): 248.

Alan D. Smith, and Dean R. Manna. 2004. Strategic Disintermediation Within the Context of E-Commerce: The Effect on Distributors and Re-Sellers. Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge 5, no. 1/2, (September 1): 374-380.