Taiwanese Journal of Mathematics

A Functional Approach to Prove Complementarity

Kazuo Kido

Full-text: Open access


Some complementarity among a firm’s activities is an important source of its profits. In this paper, we focus on the way to prove complementarity. Though there are many studies on complementarity as supermodularity or the increasing differences of a function, we introduce the notion of self increasing differences with respect to a single activity, which is an essence of convexity from the viewpoint of complementarity, and investigate some interrelations among these three notions of complementarity. Mathematically, we give a sufficient condition for a composite function to have self increasing differences. This proposition is deeply related to Topkis’ (1998) Lemma 2.6.4 on sufficient conditions for a composite function to be supermodular. Both propositions are combined and applied to yield and/or strengthen complementarity in an organization, which will also disclose the functional structure of an organization’s activities.

Article information

Taiwanese J. Math., Volume 15, Number 1 (2011), 211-227.

First available in Project Euclid: 18 July 2017

Permanent link to this document

Digital Object Identifier

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)

Zentralblatt MATH identifier

Primary: 62P20: Applications to economics [See also 91Bxx] 90B99: None of the above, but in this section 91B99: None of the above, but in this section

supermodular increasing differences complementarity bandwagon effect economies of scale


Kido, Kazuo. A Functional Approach to Prove Complementarity. Taiwanese J. Math. 15 (2011), no. 1, 211--227. doi:10.11650/twjm/1500406171. https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.twjm/1500406171

Export citation


  • M. Aoki, Towards a comparative institutional analysis, MIT Press, Massachusetts, 2001.
  • A. Beurling and A. E. Livingston, A theorem on duality mappings in Banach spaces, Arkiv för Mathematik, 4 (1962), 405-411.
  • J. I. Bulow, J. D. Geanakoplos and P. D. Klemperer, Multimarket oligopoly: Strategic substitutes and complements, Journal of Political Economy, 93 (1985), 488-511.
  • F. Y. Edgeworth, The pure theory of monopoly, 1925, in: F. Y. Edgeworth (Ed), Papers relating to political economy, vol. 1. Thoemmes Press, Bristol, 1993, pp. 111-142.
  • M. D. Eisner and T. Schwartz, Work in progress: Risking failure, surviving success, Hyperion, 1999.
  • K. Kido, K. Taniguchi and N. Watanabe, Toward a supermodular analysis of modern firms (1), Mita Business Review (Japanese), 47(4) (2004), 61-79.
  • K. Kido, K. Taniguchi and N. Watanabe, Toward a supermodular analysis of modern firms (2), Mita Business Review (Japanese), 47(5) (2004), 113-128.
  • P. Milgrom and J. Roberts, Complementarities, momentum, and the evolution of modern manufacturing, Estudios Económicos, 9 (1994), 3-42.
  • K. Murota, Discrete convex analysis, SIAM monographs on Discrete Mathematics and Applications, Philadelphia, 2003.
  • R. T. Rockafellar, Convex analysis, Princeton University Press, 1970.
  • P. A. Samuelson, Complementarity, Journal of Economic Literature, 12 (1974), 1255-1289.
  • D. M. Topkis, Minimizing a submodular function on a lattice, Operations Research, 26 (1978), 305-321.
  • D. M. Topkis, Comparative statics of the firm, Journal of Economic Theory, 67 (1995), 370-401.
  • D. M. Topkis, Supermodularity and complementarity, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1998.