How to design platform ecosystems by intrapreneurs: Implications from action design research on IoT-based platform
-
Published:2023-04-27
Issue:1
Volume:33
Page:
-
ISSN:1019-6781
-
Container-title:Electronic Markets
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Electron Markets
Author:
Inoue Yuki,Takenaka Takeshi,Kasasaku Takami,Tamegai Tadafumi,Arai Ryohei
Abstract
AbstractThe recent technological evolution of the Internet of Things (IoT) and data sciences has created opportunities for intrapreneurs in non-platform firms to expand their businesses into platform ecosystem-related businesses. However, previous studies have typically focused on cases involving entrepreneurs. This study aims to clarify how intrapreneurs’ design for platform ecosystems could be different from that of entrepreneurs. We conducted an action design research (ADR) project in collaboration with a company for 29 months, and designed a platform ecosystem structure based on technological platforms related to radio frequency identifiers (RFID). Our main contribution is the following six-step process that describes how intrapreneurs design platform ecosystems: (1) designing an initial ecosystem structure based on platform ecosystem concepts and certain concepts related to the targeted market; (2) analyzing past business cases; (3) making the ecosystem structure into concrete shape; (4) verifying its validity; (5) elaborating the ecosystem structure; and (6) proposing the designed ecosystem business. Our findings highlight the differences between intrapreneurs’ and entrepreneurs’ designs of the ecosystem. First, when the design processes are underway, the direction of the design of the ecosystem needs to be flexibly modified to align with the strategy of the firm. Second, evidence for the success of the proposed platform ecosystem is required to reduce uncertainty and clarify the legitimacy of the proposition. Third, the structure of a platform ecosystem designed by intrapreneurs becomes a style that supports the existing businesses and networks of the firm.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Management of Technology and Innovation,Marketing,Computer Science Applications,Economics and Econometrics,Business and International Management
Reference73 articles.
1. Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management, 43(1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316678451 2. Ansari, S., Graud, R., & Kumaraswamy, A. (2016). The disruptor’s dilemma: TIVO and the U.S. television ecosystem. Strategic Management Journal, 37, 1829–1853. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2442 3. Armstrong, M. (2006). Competition in two-sided markets. Rand Journal of Economics, 37(3), 668–691. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2006.tb00037.x 4. Bogers, M., Zobel, A. K., Afuah, A., Almirall, E., Brunswicker, S., Dahlander, L., Frederiksen, L., Gawer, A., Gruber, M., Haefliger, S., Hagedoorn, J., Hilgers, D., Laursen, K., Magnusson, M. G., Majchrzak, A., McCarthy, I. P., Moeslein, K. M., Nambisan, S., Piller, F. T., Radziwon, A., Rossi-Lamastra, C., Sims, J., & Ter Wal, A. L. J. (2017). The Open innovation research landscape: Established perspectives and emerging themes across different levels of analysis. Industry and Innovation, 24(1), 8–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2016.1240068 5. Boudreau, K. J., & Jeppesen, L. B. (2015). Unpaid crowd complementors: The platform network effect mirage. Strategic Management Journal, 36(12), 1761–1777. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2324
|
|