tegwick
574bb11db6
Demonstrates infospace composition: the Wealth of Nations infospace is used as a discipline, applying Smith's economic framework as a lens to analyse modern supply chain management concepts. New example: examples/supply-chain-vsm/ - infospace.yaml binding WoN as discipline (../infospace-with-history) - 3 source documents: coordination mechanisms, capital & inventory, market structure (~400 words each, original content) - supply-chain-entity-schema-v1.0.md with WoN Concept required section - won-mapping-schema-v1.0.md with Conceptual Continuity rating - artifacts/won-reference/core-entities.md — 12 curated WoN entities for injection as discipline context - 8 hand-crafted entity files demonstrating LLM output format - 3 mapping files with full rationale and VSM inheritance chains - Viable: YES (5/5 thresholds) Key mappings demonstrated: Demand Signal → Effectual Demand (Strong, S2) Vendor-Managed Inventory → Division of Labour (Strong, S1/S2) Just-in-Time Inventory → Circulating Capital (Strong, S1/S3) Bullwhip Effect → Natural Price (Moderate, S2) Platform Intermediary → Merchant Capital (Strong, S2/S4) Monopsony Power → Combination of Masters (Strong, S3*) Platform fix: entity_parser.py now recognises ## Supply Chain Domain as a domain alias for ## Economic Domain, enabling composed infospaces to use their own domain section name. Tutorial §13 rewritten with real commands, real output, and the full mapping table from the demo. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
41 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown
41 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown
<!-- generated: provider=openrouter model=arcee-ai/trinity-large-preview:free date=2026-02-22 source=market-structure -->
|
|
|
|
# Monopsony Power
|
|
|
|
## Definition
|
|
|
|
Market power held by a dominant buyer who faces many sellers, enabling
|
|
the buyer to suppress prices, extend payment terms, and impose conditions
|
|
below what competitive markets would support. In supply chains, monopsony
|
|
is exercised by large retailers or manufacturers who represent a significant
|
|
fraction of a supplier's revenue, giving them leverage to dictate terms
|
|
the supplier cannot credibly refuse. The long-run consequence is supplier
|
|
margin compression, underinvestment in quality, and supply fragility.
|
|
|
|
## Source
|
|
|
|
Market Structure in Modern Supply Chains, §Monopsony and Buyer Power
|
|
|
|
## Supply Chain Domain
|
|
|
|
Market Structure
|
|
|
|
## VSM Assignment
|
|
|
|
S3* — Monopsony power is exercised through the management control layer:
|
|
buyers set terms (pricing, payment, specification) that govern the
|
|
operational relationship. The S3* (audit/control) analogy holds because
|
|
the buyer uses its inspection and approval rights to enforce compliance
|
|
with terms extracted through buyer power.
|
|
|
|
## WoN Concept
|
|
|
|
Combination of Masters — Smith describes the combination of masters as the
|
|
coordinated exercise of employer power to suppress wages below their
|
|
competitive level. Monopsony power in modern supply chains operates through
|
|
the same mechanism: a concentrated buyer (or buyers acting in parallel)
|
|
systematically extracts value from fragmented suppliers, just as Smith's
|
|
combination of masters extracted value from fragmented workers. The parallel
|
|
is structural: in both cases, one side of the market is coordinated and the
|
|
other is atomistic, enabling systematic suppression of returns.
|