Wikipedia

Competition

For other uses, seeCompetition (disambiguation),Compete (disambiguation),andCompetitor (ship).

Competitionis arivalrywhere two or more parties strive for a commongoalwhich cannot be shared: where one's gain is the other's loss (an example of which is azero-sum game).[1]Competition can arise between entities such as organisms, individuals, economic and social groups, etc. The rivalry can be over attainment of any exclusive goal, includingrecognition.

Competition in sports. One selection of images showing some of the sporting events that are classed asathleticscompetitions.

Competition occurs in nature, between living organisms which co-exist in the sameenvironment.Animals compete over water supplies, food, mates, and otherbiological resources.Humansusuallycompete for food and mates,though when these needs are met deep rivalries often arise over the pursuit ofwealth,power, prestige, andfamewhen in a static, repetitive, or unchanging environment.[2]Competition is a major tenet ofmarket economiesand business, often associated with business competition as companies are in competition with at least one other firm over the same group of customers. Competition inside a company is usually stimulated with the larger purpose of meeting and reaching higher quality of services or improved products that the company may produce or develop.

Competition is often considered to be the opposite ofcooperation;however, in the real world, mixtures of cooperation and competition are the norm.[3]In economies, as the philosopher R. G. Collingwood argued "the presence of these two opposites together is essential to an economic system. The parties to an economic action co-operate in competing, like two chess players".[4]Optimal strategies to achieve goals are studied in the branch of mathematics known asgame theory.

Competition has been studied in several fields, includingpsychology,sociologyandanthropology.Socialpsychologists,for instance, study the nature of competition. They investigate the natural urge of competition and its circumstances. They also studygroup dynamics,to detect how competition emerges and what its effects are.Sociologists,meanwhile, study the effects of competition on society as a whole. Additionally,anthropologistsstudy thehistoryand prehistory of competition in various cultures. They also investigate how competition manifested itself in variousculturalsettings in the past, and how competition has developed over time.

Biology and ecology

edit
Main article:Competition (biology)

Competition within, between, and among species is one of the most important forces in biology, especially in the field ofecology.[5]

Competition between members of a species ( "intraspecific" ) for resources such asfood,water,territory,andsunlightmay result in an increase in the frequency of a variant of the species best suited for survival and reproduction until its fixation within a population. However, competition among resources also has a strong tendency for diversification between members of the same species, resulting in coexistence of competitive and non-competitive strategies or cycles between low and high competitiveness. Third parties within a species often favour highly competitive strategies leading to species extinction when environmental conditions are harsh (evolutionary suicide).[6]

Competition is also present between species ( "interspecific" ). When resources are limited, several species may depend on these resources. Thus, each of the species competes with the others to gain access to the resources. As a result, species less suited to compete for the resources maydie outunless theyadaptby character dislocation, for instance. According toevolutionary theory,this competition within and between species for resources plays a significant role innatural selection.At shorter time scales, competition is also one of the most important factors controlling diversity in ecological communities, but at larger scales expansion and contraction of ecological space is a much larger factor than competition.[7]This is illustrated by living plant communities where asymmetric competition and competitive dominance frequently occur.[5]Multiple examples of symmetric and asymmetric competition also exist for animals.[8]

Consumer competitions – games of luck or skill

edit
Further information:Game of chance

In Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, competitions or lotto are the equivalent of what are commonly known assweepstakesin the United States. The correct technical name for Australian consumer competitions is a trade promotion lottery or lotto.[9]

Competition or trade promotion lottery entrants enter to win a prize or prizes, hence many entrants are all in competition, or competing for a limited number of prizes.

A trade promotion lottery or competition is a free entry lottery run to promote goods or services supplied by a business. An example is where you purchase goods or services and then given the chance to enter into the lottery and possibly win a prize. A trade promotion lottery can be called a lotto, competition, contest, sweepstake, or giveaway.

Such competitions can be games of luck (randomly drawn) or skill (judged on an entry question or submission), or possibly a combination of both.

People that enjoy entering competitions are known as compers.[10][11]

Competitiveness

edit

Manyphilosophersandpsychologistshave identified a trait in most living organisms which can drive the particular organism to compete. This trait, called competitiveness, is viewed as having a highadaptive value,which coexists along with the urge for survival.[2]Competitiveness, or the inclination to compete, though, has become synonymous with aggressiveness and ambition in theEnglish language.More advancedcivilizationsintegrate aggressiveness and competitiveness into theirinteractions,as a way to distribute resources and adapt. Many plants compete with neighboring ones for sunlight.

The term also applies toeconometrics.Here, it is a comparative measure of the ability and performance of a firm or sub-sector to sell and produce/supply goods and/or services in a given market. The two academic bodies of thought on the assessment of competitiveness are theStructure Conduct Performance Paradigmand the more contemporaryNew Empirical Industrial Organisationmodel. Predicting changes in the competitiveness of business sectors is becoming an integral and explicit step in public policymaking. Within capitalist economic systems, the drive of enterprises is to maintain and improve their own competitiveness.

One-upmanship

edit

One-upmanship,also called "one-upsmanship",[12]is the art or practice of successively outdoing acompetitor.The term was first used in the title of a book byStephen Potter,published in 1952[13]as a follow-up toThe Theory and Practice ofGamesmanship(or the Art of Winning Games without Actually Cheating)(1947). OtherLifemanshiptitles in his series oftongue-in-cheekself-help books,as well as film and television derivatives, teach various ploys to achieve this. This comicsatireofself-helpstyle guides manipulates traditional British conventions for the gamester. The principle being all life being a game, who understands thatif you're not one-up, you're one-down.Potter's unprincipled principles apply to almost any possession, experience or situation, deriving maximum undeserved rewards and discomfitting the opposition. The 1960 filmSchool for Scoundrelsand its2006 remakewere satiric portrayals of how to use Potter's ideas.

In that context, the term refers to a satiric course in thegambitsrequired for the systematic and conscious practice of "creative intimidation", making one's associates feel inferior and thereby gaining the status of being "one-up" on them. Viewed seriously, it is a phenomenon ofgroup dynamicsthat can have significant effects in themanagementfield: for instance, manifesting inoffice politics.[14]

Education

edit
Main article:Competition-based learning

Competition is a major factor in education. On a global scale, national education systems, intending to bring out the best in the next generation, encourage competitiveness among students throughscholarships.Countries such as England and Singapore havespecial educationprogrammes which cater for specialist students, prompting charges ofacademic elitism.Upon receipt of their academic results, students tend to compare their grades to see who is better. In severe cases, the pressure to perform in some countries is so high that it can result in stigmatization of intellectually deficient students, or even suicide as a consequence of failing the exams. Critics of competition as a motivating factor in education systems, such asAlfie Kohn,assert that competition actually has a net negative influence on the achievement levels of students, and that it "turns all of us into losers".[15]EconomistRichard Layardhas commented on the harmful effects, stating "people feel that they are under a great deal of pressure. They feel that their main objective in life is to do better than other people. That is certainly what young people are being taught in school every day. And it's not a good basis for a society."[16]

However, other studies such as theTorrance Tests of Creative Thinkingshow that the effect of competition on students depends on each individual's level ofagency.Students with a high level of agency thrive on competition, are self-motivated, and are willing to risk failure. Compared to their counterparts who are low in agency, these students are more likely to be flexible, adaptable and creative as adults.[17][18]

Economics

edit
Main article:Competition (economics)

Merriam-Webster gives as one definition of competition (relating tobusiness) as "[...] rivalry: such as [...] the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms".[19]Adam Smithin his 1776 bookThe Wealth of Nationsand later economists described competition in general as allocating productiveresourcesto their most highly valued uses and encouragingefficiency.[20][need quotation to verify]Latermicroeconomic theorydistinguished betweenperfect competitionandimperfect competition,concluding that no system of resource allocation is more efficient thanperfect competition.[citation needed]Competition, according to the theory, causes commercial firms to develop new products, services and technologies, which would give consumers greater selection and better products. The greater selection typically causes lower prices for the products, compared to what the price would be if there was no competition (monopoly) or little competition (oligopoly).[citation needed]

However, competition may also lead to wasted (duplicated) effort and to increasedcosts(and prices) in some circumstances. For example, the intense competition for the small number oftop jobs in music and movie-actingleads many aspiring musicians and actors to make substantial investments in training which are not recouped, because only a fraction become successful. Critics[which?]have also argued that competition can be destabilizing, particularly competition between certain financial institutions.

Experts have also questioned the constructiveness of competition in profitability. It has been argued that competition-oriented objectives are counterproductive to raising revenues and profitability because they limit the options of strategies for firms as well as their ability to offer innovative responses to changes in the market.[21]In addition, the strong desire to defeat rival firms with competitive prices has the strong possibility of causingprice wars.[22]

Another distinction appearing in economics is that between competition as an end-state – as in the case of both perfect and imperfect competition – and competition as aprocess.It is a process of rivalry between firms (or consumers) intensifying selective pressures for improvements. One can restate this as a process of discovery.[23]

Three levels of end-state economic competition have been classified:[by whom?]

  • The most narrow form isdirect competition(also called "category competition" or "brand competition" ), whereproductswhich perform the same function compete against each other. For example, one brand of pick-up trucks competes with several other brands of pick-up trucks. Sometimes, two companies are rivals and one adds new products to their line, which leads to the other company distributing the same new things, and in this manner they compete.
  • The next form issubstituteorindirect competition,where products which are close substitutes for one another compete. For example, butter competes with margarine, with mayonnaise and with other various sauces and spreads.
  • The broadest form of competition is typically calledbudget competition.Included in this category is anything on which theconsumermight want to spend their availablemoney.For example, a family which has $20,000 available may choose to spend it on many different items, which can all be seen as competing with each other for the family's expenditure. This form of competition is also sometimes described as a competition of "share of wallet".

In addition, companies compete forfinancingon the capital markets (equity or debt) in order to generate the necessary cash for their operations.Investortypically consider alternative investment opportunities given their risk profile, and not only look at companies just competing on product (direct competitors). Enlarging the investment universe to includeindirect competitorsleads to a broader peer universe of comparable, indirectly competing companies.

Competition does not necessarily have to be between companies. For example,business writerssometimes refer tointernal competition.This is competition within companies. The idea was first introduced byAlfred SloanatGeneral Motorsin the 1920s. Sloan deliberately created areas of overlap betweendivisionsof the company so that each division would compete with the other divisions. For example, theChevroletdivision would compete with thePontiacdivision for somemarket segments.The competing brands by the same company allowed parts to be designed by one division and shared by several divisions, for example parts designed by Chevrolet would also be used by Pontiac. In 1931Procter & Gambleinitiated a deliberate system of internal brand-versus-brand rivalry. The company was organized[by whom?]around differentbrands,with each brand allocated resources, including a dedicated group of employees willing to champion the brand. Eachbrand managerwas given responsibility for the success or failure of the brand, and compensated accordingly.

Most businesses also encourage competition between individual employees. An example of this is a contest between sales representatives. The sales representative with the highest sales (or the best improvement in sales) over a period of time would gain benefits from the employer. This is also known asintra-brand competition.

Shalev and Asbjornsen found that success (i.e. the saving resulted) ofreverse auctionscorrelated most closely with competition. The literature widely supported the importance of competition as the primary driver of reverse auctions success.[24]Their findings appear to support that argument, as competition correlated strongly with the reverse auction success, as well as with the number of bidders.[24]

Business and economic competition in mostcountriesis often[quantify]limited or restricted. Competition often is subject to legal restrictions. For example, competition may be legally prohibited, as in the cases of agovernment monopolyor of agovernment-granted monopoly.Governments may institutetariffs,subsidiesor otherprotectionistmeasures in order to prevent or reduce competition. Depending on the respective economic policy, pure competition is to a greater or lesser extent regulated bycompetition policyandcompetition law.Another component of these activities is thediscovery process,with instances of highergovernment regulationstypically leading to less competitive businesses being launched.[25]

Nicholas Gruen has referred toThe Competition Delusion,[26]in which competition is taken to be unambiguously good, even where that competition leaks into the rules of the game. He claims this drives financialisation (the approximate doubling of proportion of economic resources dedicated to finance and to 'rule making and administering' professions such as law, accountancy and auditing.

Interstate

edit
See also:Race to the bottom

Competition between countries is quite subtle to detect, but is quite evident in theworld economy.[citation needed]Countries compete to provide the best possiblebusinessenvironment formultinational corporations.Such competition is evident by the policies undertaken by these countries to educate the future workforce. For example, East Asian economies such as Singapore, Japan and South Korea tend to compete by allocating a large portion of the budget to the education sector, including by implementing programmes such asgifted education.

Law

edit
Main article:Competition law
TheDepartment of Justicebuilding inWashington, D.C.houses the influentialantitrustenforcers of U.S. competition laws.

Competitionlaw,known in theUnited Statesas antitrust law, has three main functions:

  • First, it prohibits agreements aimed to restrict free trading between business entities and their customers. For example, acartelof sports shops who together fix football-jersey prices higher than normal is illegal.[27]
  • Second, competition law can ban the existence or abusive behaviour of a firm dominating the market. One case in point could be a software company who through itsmonopolyon computer platforms makes consumers use its media player.[28]
  • Third, to preserve competitive markets, the law supervises themergers and acquisitionsof very large corporations. Competition authorities could for instance require that a large packaging company give plastic bottlelicensesto competitors before taking over a majorPETproducer.[29]

In all three cases, competition law aims to protect thewelfare of consumersby ensuring that each business must compete for its share of themarket economy.

In recent decades,[when?]competition law has also been sold[by whom?]as good medicine to provide betterpublic services,traditionally funded bytax-payers and administered bydemocraticallyaccountable[clarification needed]governments.Hence competition law is closely connected with the law on deregulation of access to markets, providing state aids and subsidies, theprivatisationof state-owned assets and the use of independent sector regulators, such as the United Kingdom telecommunications watchdogOfcom.Behind the practice lies the theory, which over the last fifty years[when?]has been dominated byneo-classical economics.Markets are seen as the most efficient method of allocating resources, although sometimesthey fail,and regulation becomes necessary to protect the ideal market model. Behind the theory lies the history, reaching back further than theRoman Empire.The business practices of market traders,guildsand governments have always been subject to scrutiny and sometimes to severe sanctions. Since the twentieth century, competition law has become global.[citation needed]The two largest, most organised and influential systems of competition regulation areUnited States antitrust lawandEuropean Community competition law.The respective national/international authorities, theU.S. Department of Justice(DOJ) and theFederal Trade Commission(FTC) in the United States and theEuropean Commission's Competition Directorate General(DGCOMP) have formed international support- and enforcement-networks. Competition law is growing in importance every day,[citation needed]which warrants for its careful study.

Game theory

edit
Main article:Game theory

Game theory is "the study ofmathematical modelsof conflict and cooperation between intelligent rational decision-makers. "[30]Game theory is mainly used ineconomics,political science,andpsychology,as well aslogic,computer science,biologyandpoker.[31]Originally, it mainly addressedzero-sum games,in which one person's gains result in losses for the other participants.

Game theory is a major method used inmathematical economicsand business formodelingcompeting behaviors of interactingagents.[32]Applications include a wide array of economic phenomena and approaches, such asauctions,bargaining,mergers & acquisitionspricing,[33]fair division,duopolies,oligopolies,social networkformation,agent-based computational economics,[34]general equilibrium,mechanism design,[35]andvoting systems;[36]and across such broad areas asexperimental economics,[37]behavioral economics,[38]information economics,[39]industrial organization,[40]andpolitical economy.[41][42]

This research usually focuses on particular sets of strategies known as"solution concepts" or "equilibria".A common assumption is that players act rationally. In non-cooperative games, the most famous of these is theNash equilibrium.A set of strategies is a Nash equilibrium if each represents a best response to the other strategies. If all the players are playing the strategies in a Nash equilibrium, they have no unilateral incentive to deviate, since their strategy is the best they can do given what others are doing.[43][44]

Literature

edit

Literary competitions, such as contests sponsored byliterary journals,publishing houses and theaters, have increasingly become a means for aspiring writers to gain recognition. Awards for fiction include those sponsored by theMissouri Review,Boston Review,Indiana Review,North American ReviewandSouthwest Review.TheAlbeeAward, sponsored by the Yale Drama Series, is among the most prestigious playwriting awards.

Philosophy

edit

Margaret Heffernan's study,A Bigger Prize,[45] examines the perils and disadvantages of competition in (for example) biology, families, sport, education, commerce and the Soviet Union.[46]

Marx

edit

Karl Marxinsisted that "the capitalist system fosters competition and egoism in all its members and thoroughly undermines all genuine forms of community".[47] It promotes a "climate of competitive egoism and individualism", with competition for jobs and competition between employees; Marx said competition between workers exceeds that demonstrated by company owners.[48]He also points out that competition separates individuals from one another and while concentration of workers and development of better communication alleviate this, they are not a decision.[48]

Freud

edit

Sigmund Freudexplained competition as a primal dilemma in which all infants find themselves. The infant competes with other family members for the attention and affection of the parent of the opposite sex or the primary caregiving parent. During this time, a boy develops a deep fear that the father (the son's prime rival) will punish him for these feelings of desire for the mother, by castrating him. Girls develop penis envy towards all males. The girl's envy is rooted in the biologic fact that, without a penis, she cannot sexually possess mother, as the infantile id demands, resultantly, the girl redirects her desire for sexual union upon father in competitive rivalry with her mother. This constellation of feelings is known asOedipus Complex(after the Greek Mythology figure who accidentally killed his father and married his mother). This is associated with thephallic stageof childhood development where intense primal emotions of competitive rivalry with (usually) the parent of the same sex are rampant and create a crisis that must be negotiated successfully for healthy psychological development to proceed. Unresolved Oedipus complex competitiveness issues can lead to lifelong neuroses manifesting in various ways related to an overdetermined relationship to competition.

Mahatma Gandhi

edit

Gandhispeaks of egoistic competition.[49]For him, such qualities glorified and/or left unbridled, can lead to violence, conflict, discord and destructiveness. For Gandhi, competition comes from the ego, and therefore society must be based on mutual love, cooperation and sacrifice for the well-being of humanity.[49]In the society desired by Gandhi, each individual will cooperate and serve for the welfare of others and people will share each other's joys, sorrows and achievements as a norm of a social life. For him, in a non-violent society, competition does not have a place and this should become realized with more people making the personal choice to have fewer tendencies toward egoism and selfishness.[49]

Politics

edit

Competition is also found inpolitics.Indemocracies,afree and fair electionis anelectoral competitionfor an elected office. In other words, two or more candidates strive and compete against one another to attain a position of power. The winner gains the seat of the elected office for a predefined period of time, towards the end of which another election is usually held to determine the next holder of the office.

In addition, there is inevitable competition inside a government. Because several offices are appointed, potential candidates compete against the others in order to gain the particular office. Departments may also compete for a limited amount of resources, such as forfunding.Finally, where there areparty systems,elected leaders of different parties will ultimately compete against the other parties forlaws,fundingandpower.

Finally, competition also exists betweengovernments.Eachcountryornationalitystruggles for world dominance, power, ormilitarystrength. For example, theUnited Statescompeted against theSoviet Unionin theCold Warfor world power, and the two also struggled over the different types of government (in these casesrepresentative democracyandcommunism). The result of this type of competition often leads to worldwide tensions, and may sometimes erupt intowarfare.

Sports

edit
TheUnited States Olympic Committee's headquarters inColorado Springs, Colorado.TheOlympic Gamesare regarded as the international pinnacle of sports competition.

While somesportsandgames(such asfishingorhiking) have been viewed as primarily recreational, most sports are considered competitive. The majority involve competition between two or more persons (sometimes usinghorsesorcars). For example, in a game ofbasketball,two teams compete against one another to determine who can score the most points. When there is no set reward for the winning team, many players gain a sense ofpride.In addition, extrinsic rewards may also be given. Athletes, besides competing against other humans, also compete againstnaturein sports such aswhitewater kayakingormountaineering,where the goal is to reach a destination, with only natural barriers impeding the process. A regularly scheduled (for instance annual) competition meant to determine the "best" competitor of that cycle is called achampionship.

Competitive sports are governed by codified rules agreed upon by the participants. Violating these rules is considered to beunfair competition.Thus, sports provide artificial (not natural) competition; for example, competing for control of a ball, or defending territory on a playing field is not an innate biological factor in humans. Athletes in sports such asgymnasticsand competitivedivingcompete against each other in order to come closest to a conceptual ideal of a perfect performance, which incorporates measurable criteria and standards which are translated into numerical ratings and scores by appointed judges.

Sports competition is generally broken down into three categories:individualsports, such asarchery;dualsports, such asdoubles tennis,andteamsports competition, such ascricketorfootball.While most sports competitions are recreation, there exist severalmajorandminorprofessional sports leagues throughout the world. TheOlympic Games,held every four years, is usually regarded as the international pinnacle of sports competition.

Trade

edit

Competition is also found intrade.For nations, as well as firms it is important to understand trade dynamics in order to market their goods and services effectively in international markets.Balance of tradecan be considered a crude, but widely used proxy for international competitiveness across levels:country,industryor evenfirm.“We share a common belief that innovation comes from the edges,” said Luisa Delgado, an SAP HR director, who noted the company valued the ability of many autistic people to “think differently and spark innovation.” SAP’s Bangalore office saw its productivity increase after deploying autistic hires. The company is working closely with a Danish not-for-profit specializing in IT job placements for individuals with autism spectrum disorders. "[50]Research data hints that exporting firms have a higher survival rate and achieve greater employment growth compared with non-exporters.

Using a simple concept to measure heights that firms can climb may help improve execution of strategies. International competitiveness can be measured on several criteria but few are as flexible and versatile to be applied across levels as Trade Competitiveness Index (TCI)[51]

Hypercompetitiveness

edit

The tendency toward extreme, unhealthy competition has been termedhypercompetitiveness.This concept originated inKaren Horney's theories onneurosis;specifically, the highly aggressive personality type which is characterized as "moving against people". In her view, some people have a need to compete and win at all costs as a means of maintaining theirself-worth.These individuals are likely to turn any activity into a competition, and they will feel threatened if they find themselves losing. Researchers have found that men and women who score high on the trait of hypercompetitiveness are morenarcissisticand less psychologically healthy than those who score low on the trait.[52]Hypercompetitive individuals generally believe that winning is the only thing that matters.[53]

Consequences

edit

Competition can have both beneficial and detrimental effects. Many evolutionary biologists view inter-species and intra-species competition as the driving force ofadaptation,and ultimately ofevolution.However, some biologists disagree, citing competition as a driving force only on a small scale, and citing the larger scale drivers of evolution to be abiotic factors (termed 'Room to Roam').[7]Richard Dawkinsprefers to think of evolution in terms of competition between single genes, which have the welfare of the organism 'in mind' only insofar as that welfare furthers their own selfish drives for replication (termed the 'selfish gene').

Somesocial Darwinistsclaim that competition also serves as a mechanism for determining the best-suited group; politically, economically and ecologically. Positively, competition may serve as a form ofrecreationor a challenge provided that it is non-hostile. On the negative side, competition can cause injury and loss to the organisms involved, and drain valuable resources and energy. In the human species competition can be expensive on many levels, not only in lives lost to war, physical injuries, and damaged psychological well-beings, but also in the health effects from everyday civilian life caused by work stress, long work hours, abusive working relationships, and poor working conditions, that detract from the enjoyment of life, even as such competition results in financial gain for the owners.

See also

edit
Look upcompetitionorcompetitorin Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Wikiquote has quotations related toCompetition.

References

edit
  1. ^Smith, Ken G.; Ferrier, Walter J.; Ndofor, Hermann (2017-11-26), Hitt, Michael A.; Freeman, R. Edward; Harrison, Jeffrey S. (eds.),"Competitive Dynamics Research: Critique and Future Directions",The Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management,Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, pp. 309–354,doi:10.1111/b.9780631218616.2006.00012.x,ISBN978-1-4051-6402-3,retrieved2022-09-11
  2. ^abCabral, J. Centurion; Garcia, Calebe Mattos; Solano, Maiara; de Almeida, Rosa Maria Martins (2022-12-29)."More than a feeling: Effects of competitive asymmetry on human emotions".The Journal of General Psychology(in French).150(4): 485–511.doi:10.1080/00221309.2022.2160427.ISSN0022-1309.PMID36579926.S2CID255292057.
  3. ^"Competition".Sociology Guide.Archived fromthe originalon 17 March 2022.Retrieved2022-09-11.
  4. ^Collingwood, Robin, George (1926)."Economics as a Philosophical Science".The International Journal of Ethics.36(2): 162–185 at. p. 177.doi:10.1086/intejethi.36.2.2377247.S2CID143530850.{{cite journal}}:CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  5. ^abKeddy, Paul A. (2001).Competition(2nd ed.). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.ISBN978-94-010-0694-1.OCLC840307667.
  6. ^Baldauf, Sebastian A.; Engqvist, Leif; Weissing, Franz J. (29 October 2014)."Diversifying evolution of competitiveness".Nature Communications.5:5233.Bibcode:2014NatCo...5.5233B.doi:10.1038/ncomms6233.PMID25351604.
  7. ^abSahney, S.; Benton, M.J.; Ferry, P.A. (2010)."Links between global taxonomic diversity, ecological diversity and the expansion of vertebrates on land".Biology Letters.6(4): 544–47.doi:10.1098/rsbl.2009.1024.PMC2936204.PMID20106856.
  8. ^Borzée, Amaël; Kim, Jun Young; Jang, Yikweon (7 Sep 2016)."Asymmetric competition over calling sites in two closely related treefrog species".Scientific Reports.6:32569.Bibcode:2016NatSR...632569B.doi:10.1038/srep32569.PMC5013533.PMID27599461.
  9. ^"Trade promotion lotteries".Trade & Investment.NSW Government Office of Liquor, Gaming & Racing. Archived fromthe originalon 2013-07-29.Retrieved2013-08-02.
  10. ^Sear, Cynthia (2022-08-25)."On Becoming Unstuck: Teleoaffective Tactics, Thrills, and the Serial Entrants of Promotional Competitions in Australia".Ethnos:1–20.doi:10.1080/00141844.2022.2114517.ISSN0014-1844.S2CID251873459.
  11. ^Sear, Cynthia (2022-11-20)."It's such a rush: the secret lives of compers".TheGuardian.
  12. ^"One-upmanship".Merriam-Webster.Retrieved2021-04-26.
  13. ^In full,One-Upmanship: Being Some Account of the Activities and Teachings of the Lifemanship Correspondence College of One-Upness and Games Lifemastery.
  14. ^Vallabhaneni, S. Rao (2015). "Organizational Politics".Wiley CIAexcel Exam Review 2015.John Wiley & Sons. p. 326.ISBN978-1-119-09431-9.
  15. ^Kohn, Alfie (1986).No contest: the case against competition.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.ISBN978-0-395-63125-6.OCLC1007073234.[page needed]
  16. ^Salitto, David (12 April 2011)."What really makes us happy?".BBC News.Archivedfrom the original on 2 March 2022.Retrieved2022-09-11.
  17. ^Conti, Regina; Picariello, Martha; Collins, Mary (December 2001)."The impact of competition on intrinsic motivation and creativity: Considering gender, gender segregation and gender role orientation".Personality and Individual Differences.31(8): 1273–1289.doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00217-8.
  18. ^Eisenberg, Jacob; Thompson, William Forde (16 April 2012). "The Effects of Competition on Improvisers' Motivation, Stress, and Creative Performance".Creativity Research Journal.23(2): 129–136.doi:10.1080/10400419.2011.571185.ISSN1040-0419.S2CID144893872.
  19. ^Compare:Definition of competition- "competition [...] 1: the act or process of competing: rivalry: such as [...] a: the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms"
  20. ^George J. Stigler([1987]2008). "competition,"The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics.Abstract.Archived2015-02-15 at theWayback Machine
  21. ^J. Scott Armstrong; Fred Collopy (1994)."The Profitability of Winning"(PDF).Chief Executive:61–63. Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2010-06-22.Retrieved2011-12-06.A 1996 review of the evidence, summarized in this paper, found that competitor-oriented objectives reduced profitability. We describe new evidence from 12 studies, one of which is introduced in this paper. The new evidence supports the conclusion that competitor-oriented objectives are harmful, especially when managers receive information about competitors' market shares.
  22. ^J. Scott Armstrong; Kesten C. Greene (2007)."Competitor-oriented Objectives: The Myth of Market Share"(PDF).International Journal of Business.12(1): 116–34.ISSN1083-4346.Archived(PDF)from the original on 11 September 2022.
  23. ^Blaug, Mark (2001)."Is Competition Such a Good Thing? Static Efficiency versus Dynamic Efficiency".Review of Industrial Organization.19(1): 37–48.doi:10.1023/a:1011160622792.ISSN0889-938X.S2CID154441911.
  24. ^abShalev, Moshe Eitan; Asbjornsen, Stee (2010-03-30)."Electronic Reverse Auctions and the Public Sector – Factors of Success".Journal of Public Procurement.10(3). Rochester, NY: 428–452.SSRN1727409.
  25. ^Kirzner, Israel M. (30 September 1982)."Competition, Regulation, and the Market Process: An" Austrian "Perspective"(PDF).Cato Institute Policy Analysis(18). Cato Institute.Archived(PDF)from the original on 2 August 2019.
  26. ^Gruen, Nicholas (February 2020)."Trust and the competition delusion".Griffith Review.67.ISBN9781925773804.
  27. ^JJB Sports PLC v Office of Fair Trading,1022/1/1/03(CAT 1 October 2003).
  28. ^In the E.U. side of the saga, seeCase T-201/04
    Archived2022-02-10 at theWayback MachineMicrosoft v. CommissionOrder, [revised] 17 September 2007
  29. ^Commission of the European Communities v Tetra Laval BV,European Court Reports Case C-12/03 P(EU Court of Justice 15 February 2005).
  30. ^Myerson, Roger B. (1997).Game Theory: Analysis of Conflict.Harvard University Press.ISBN9780674341166.p.1.Chapter-preview links, pp.vii–xi.
  31. ^Chabris, Christopher (26 July 2013)."The Science of Winning Poker".The Wall Street Journal.Retrieved11 September2022.
  32. ^• AtJEL:C7of theJournal of Economic Literatureclassification codes.
    •R.J. Aumann(2008). "game theory,"The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics,2nd Edition.Abstract.
    •Martin Shubik(1981). "Game Theory Models and Methods in Political Economy," inKenneth Arrowand Michael Intriligator, ed.,Handbook of Mathematical Economics,v. 1, pp. 285–330doi:10.1016/S1573-4382(81)01011-4.
    •Carl Shapiro(1989). "The Theory of Business Strategy,"RAND Journal of Economics,20(1), pp. 125–37JSTOR2555656.
  33. ^N. Agarwal and P. Zeephongsekul.Psychological Pricing in Mergers & Acquisitions using Game Theory,School of Mathematics and Geospatial Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne. 19th International Congress on Modelling and Simulation, 12–16 December 2011
  34. ^•Leigh Tesfatsion(2006). "Agent-Based Computational Economics: A Constructive Approach to Economic Theory," ch. 16,Handbook of Computational Economics,v. 2, pp. 831–80doi:10.1016/S1574-0021(05)02016-2.
    •Joseph Y. Halpern(2008). "computer science and game theory,"The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics,2nd Edition.Abstract.
  35. ^• FromThe New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics(2008), 2nd Edition:
    Roger B. Myerson."mechanism design."AbstractArchivedNovember 23, 2011, at theWayback Machine.
    _____. "revelation principle."Abstract.
    • Tuomas Sandholm. "computing in mechanism design."Abstract.ArchivedNovember 23, 2011, at theWayback Machine
    •Noam Nisanand Amir Ronen (2001). "Algorithmic Mechanism Design,"Games and Economic Behavior,35(1–2), pp.166–96.
    •Noam Nisanet al., ed. (2007).Algorithmic Game Theory,Cambridge University Press.DescriptionArchived2012-05-05 at theWayback Machine.
  36. ^Aumann, R. and Hart, S. (eds.) (1994).Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,v. 2, ch. 30:"Voting Procedures"and ch. 31:"Social Choice."
  37. ^•Vernon L. Smith,1992. "Game Theory and Experimental Economics: Beginnings and Early Influences," in E. R. Weintraub, ed.,Towards a History of Game Theory,pp.241–82.
    • _____, 2001. "Experimental Economics,"International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences,pp. 5100–08.Abstractper sect. 1.1 & 2.1.
    •Charles R. Plottand Vernon L. Smith, ed., 2008.Handbook of Experimental Economics Results,v. 1, Elsevier, Part 4, Games,ch. 45–66.
    • Vincent P. Crawford (1997). "Theory and Experiment in the Analysis of Strategic Interaction," inAdvances in Economics and Econometrics: Theory and Applications,pp.206–42.Cambridge. Reprinted in Colin F. Camereret al., ed. (2003).Advances in Behavioral Economics,Princeton. 1986–2003 papers.Description,preview,Princeton, ch. 12.
    • Martin Shubik, 2002. "Game Theory and Experimental Gaming," in R. Aumann and S. Hart, ed.,Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,Elsevier, v. 3, pp. 2327–51.doi:10.1016/S1574-0005(02)03025-4.
  38. ^FromThe New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics(2008), 2nd Edition:
    •Faruk Gul."behavioural economics and game theory."Abstract.
    •Colin F. Camerer."behavioral game theory."Abstract.ArchivedNovember 23, 2011, at theWayback Machine
    • _____ (1997). "Progress in Behavioral Game Theory,"Journal of Economic Perspectives,11(4), p. 172, pp.167–88.
    • _____ (2003).Behavioral Game Theory,Princeton.Description,preview([ctrl]+), and ch. 1link.
    • _____,George Loewenstein,andMatthew Rabin,ed. (2003).Advances in Behavioral Economics,Princeton. 1986–2003 papers.Description,contents,andpreview.
    •Drew Fudenberg(2006). "Advancing BeyondAdvances in Behavioral Economics,"Journal of Economic Literature,44(3), pp. 694–711JSTOR30032349.
  39. ^• Eric Rasmusen (2007).Games and Information,4th ed.Descriptionandchapter-preview.
    •David M. Kreps(1990).Game Theory and Economic Modelling.Description.
    • R. Aumann and S. Hart, ed. (1992, 2002).Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applicationsv. 1,ch. 3–6and v. 3,ch. 43.
  40. ^•Jean Tirole(1988).The Theory of Industrial Organization,MIT Press.Descriptionand chapter-preview links, pp.vii–ix,"General Organization," pp.5–6,and "Non-Cooperative Game Theory: A User's Guide Manual,'" ch. 11, pp.423–59.
    • Kyle Bagwell and Asher Wolinsky (2002). "Game theory and Industrial Organization," ch. 49,Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, v. 3, pp.1851–1895.
    • Martin Shubik (1959).Strategy and Market Structure: Competition, Oligopoly, and the Theory of Games,Wiley.Descriptionand reviewextract.
    • _____ with Richard Levitan (1980).Market Structure and Behavior,Harvard University Press. Reviewextract.Archived15 March 2010 at theWayback Machine
  41. ^• Martin Shubik (1981). "Game Theory Models and Methods in Political Economy," inHandbook of Mathematical Economics,v. 1, pp. 285–330doi:10.1016/S1573-4382(81)01011-4.
    •_____ (1987).A Game-Theoretic Approach to Political Economy.MIT Press.Description.Archived29 June 2011 at theWayback Machine
  42. ^• Martin Shubik (1978). "Game Theory: Economic Applications," in W. Kruskal and J.M. Tanur, ed.,International Encyclopedia of Statistics,v. 2, pp. 372–78.
    • Robert Aumann andSergiu Hart,ed.Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications(scrollable to chapter-outline or abstract links):
    1992.v. 1;1994.v. 2;2002.v. 3.
  43. ^Game-theoretic model to examine the two tradeoffs in the acquisition of information for a careful balancing actArchived2013-05-24 at theWayback MachineResearch paperINSEAD
  44. ^Chevalier-Roignant, Benoît; Trigeorgis, Lenos (15 February 2012)."Options Games: Balancing the trade-off between flexibility and commitment".European Financial Review.Archived fromthe originalon 20 June 2013.Retrieved3 January2013.
  45. ^ Heffernan, Margaret(2014).A Bigger Prize: Why Competition Isn't Everything and How We Do Better.London: Simon and Schuster.ISBN9781471100772.Retrieved2014-03-16.
  46. ^ Morris, Iain (2014-03-10)."A Bigger Prize review – the price we pay for competition".Books.The Guardian(UK ed.). Guardian News and Media Limited.ISSN0261-3077.Retrieved2014-03-16.Margaret Heffernan's brave study shows how the competitive instinct can be bad for us in all walks of life, from sport to finance
  47. ^ Buchanan, Allen E.(1982).Marx and Justice: The Radical Critique of Liberalism.Philosophy and Society Series. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Incorporated. p. 95.ISBN9780847670390.Retrieved2014-03-16.This problem is greatly exacerbated by Marx's insistence that the capitalist system fosters competition and egoism in all its members and thoroughly undermines all genuine forms of community.
  48. ^ab Buchanan, Allen E. (1982-01-01).Marx and Justice: The Radical Critique of Liberalism.Methuen.ISBN978-0-416-33450-0.
  49. ^abc Dayal, Parmeshwari (2006).Gandhian Theory of Social Reconstruction.Atlantic Publishers & Dist.ISBN978-81-269-0603-1.
  50. ^Schrage, Michael."Autism's Competitive Advantage, and Challenge, in the Workplace".
  51. ^Manthri P.; Bhokray K.; Momaya K. S. (2015)."Export Competitiveness of Select Firms from India: Glimpse of Trends and Implications"(PDF).Indian Journal of Marketing.45(5): 7–13.doi:10.17010/ijom/2015/v45/i5/79934.Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2016-03-04.Retrieved2015-05-28.
  52. ^Ryckman, R. M.; Thornton, B.; Butler, J. C. (1994). "Personality correlates of the hypercompetitive attitude scale: Validity tests of Horney's theory of neurosis".Journal of Personality Assessment.62(1): 84–94.doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6201_8.PMID8138889.
  53. ^"Competition freaks".Los Angeles Times.28 November 2005.Retrieved2 February2021.
edit
Look upone-upmanshipin Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Competition&oldid=1255859546"