DISRUPSI EKOSISTEM OTOMOTIF JEPANG DI INDONESIA: ANALISIS STRATEGI SENTRALISASI DAN PENETAPAN HARGA AGRESIF BYD DALAM TRANSISI EV
Keywords:
industrial disruption, electric vehicle, Japanese OEM, BYD, supply chain, pricing strategy, adaptive capabilitiesAbstract
For decades, Indonesia's automotive industry has been dominated by a Japanese production ecosystem built upon long-term partnerships between Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) and local suppliers. However, the recent entry of BYD—a Chinese electric vehicle (EV) manufacturer—has disrupted this well-established structure through its centralized supply chain strategy and aggressive pricing. This study aims to analyze the strategic impact of BYD’s business model on the Japanese automotive ecosystem in Indonesia, and to identify the key challenges within the broader context of the country’s EV transition.This research adopts a descriptive qualitative case study approach, utilizing semi-structured interviews with seven informants from Tier 1 and Tier 2 supplier companies serving Japanese OEMs. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify recurring patterns in the experiences and perceptions of industry actors regarding the presence of BYD.Findings reveal that BYD’s centralized approach has weakened the involvement and bargaining power of local suppliers, creating structural tensions within the supply chain. Furthermore, despite offering competitive prices, BYD faces several long-term challenges in Indonesia, including inadequate charging infrastructure, safety concerns related to battery reliability, high total cost of ownership (TCO), and consumer skepticism about product quality. This study contributes to a deeper understanding of industrial disruption in developing countries and provides a foundation for developing adaptive strategies and inclusive industrial policies.
References
ACEA. (2023). Electric vehicle adoption and infrastructure development in Southeast Asia. European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Dyer, J. H. (1996). Specialized assets, supplier switching costs and relational contracts: Evidence from the auto industry. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 29(3), 387–403.
IEA. (2023). Global EV Outlook 2023: Catching up with climate ambitions. International Energy Agency. https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2023
Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing management (15th ed.). Pearson Education.
Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. Free Press.
Thaler, R. H. (2015). Misbehaving: The making of behavioral economics. W. W. Norton & Company.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Harper & Row.
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1–22.
international Energy Agency (IEA). (2023). Global EV Outlook 2023: Catching up with climate ambitions. Retrieved from
China EV Fire Incidents Report. (2023). Annual report on electric vehicle fire cases in China. Ministry of Emergency Management of the People’s Republic of China.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.