This thesis is motivated by three simple yet fundamental questions in business strategy of mobile telephony carriers: What generic strategy does each of them implement to win? What made differences in their business performances? What are the impacts of regulation on the market? The now prevalent "five forces" and three "generic competitive strategy" introduced by Michael Porter(1980) delivers well-grounded basis to understand generic strategies of mobile carriers. In addition, Porter's "value chain" identifies key activities of mobile carriers to be the sources of competitive advantage, from which factor analysis stems in the form of quantifiable information.
It has been difficult to analyze the generic strategy of a mobile carrier from researcher's perspective. This study provides systematic way of identifying generic strategy of each mobile carrier in an organized fashion. First, "five forces" analysis provides comprehensive understanding of several key structural factors in the mobile telephony service industry. The analysis specifically addresses which factor works against a mobile carrier and how the overall profitability is expected to move. In doing so, it takes advantage of the unique research opportunities presented by the launch of Personal Communications Services(PCS) in 1997 and the peculiar mode of competition characterized by handset subsidy competition, which made significant contributions to the high market growth in 1998. Second, "value chain" analysis explores the sources of competitive advantage of mobile carriers by activity to find out useful implications comprising generic strategies. Third, the factor analysis complements the former analysis by rigorous statistical method based upon key activities presented by "value chain" analysis. Three analysis altogether elucidate external and internal forces which shape diversity across mobile carriers, identifying the generic strategy employed by mobile carriers in 1998.
The study contributes to the ongoing debate in regulatory interventions of the Ministry of Information and Communication by revealing some aspects of market distortions brought by price regulation, restriction on handset subsidy and quality evaluation program. Apparently influenced by them, the divergent strategies of five mobile carriers illustrate varying business performances in 1999, when quality competition prevailed while handset subsidy competition did in 1998.
