Abstract
AbstractMost platform literature focuses on single platforms and their governance, e.g. concerning app developers. Yet, platform competition and dynamics are increasingly important as they form connections with each other and build complex networks. More focus on platform-to-platform relationships and the role of standards is warranted. Therefore, the goal of this study is to investigate how platform sponsors select platforms to promote as compatible with their own products, taking open standards and “giant platforms” into account. To address these questions, we construct a unique data set covering 157 platforms in the smart home market. We conduct a network analysis based on an exponential random graph model (ERGM) to incorporate platform features, dyadic characteristics, and structural processes. We find that platform-to-platform compatibility promotion is determined by a careful selection of platforms with dissimilar industry sectors and ecosystem niches. We identify two strategic approaches to select and promote platforms as compatible, based on standard complementarity and the size of the installed base. We find that platforms more often promote other platforms with similar supported standards. The majority of endorsements are directed at giant platforms, allowing platforms to support a smaller number of standards and thus a reduced degree of openness at the technology level. Platforms often integrate several giant platforms at the same time. Our study makes two major contributions to the literature. First, we extend the concept of selective promotion (Rietveld et al. 2019) to include inter-platform compatibility and open technology standards. Second, we demonstrate how platform sponsors compensate for higher accessibility at the technology level with transparency at the marketplace level.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Management of Technology and Innovation,Marketing,Computer Science Applications,Economics and Econometrics,Business and International Management
Reference88 articles.
1. Albert, R., & Barabási, A.-L. (2002). Statistical mechanics of complex networks. Reviews of Modern Physics, 74(1), 47–97. https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.74.47
2. Ali, S., & Yusuf, Z. (2018). Mapping the smart-home market. Boston Consulting Group. https://www.bcg.com/de-de/publications/2018/mapping-smart-home-market
3. Armstrong, M. (2006). Competition in two-sided markets. The RAND Journal of Economics, 37(3), 668–691. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2006.tb00037.x
4. Baldwin, C. Y., & Woodard, C. J. (2009). The architecture of platforms: A unified view. In A. Gawer, Platforms, Markets and Innovation (pp. 19–44). Edward Elgar.
5. Baron, J., & Spulber, D. F. (2018). Technology standards and standard setting organizations: Introduction to the searle center database. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 27(3), 462–503.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献