IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v90-91y2020is0166497218305303.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Internet of things (IoT) platform competition: Consumer switching versus provider multihoming

Author

Listed:
  • Basaure, Arturo
  • Vesselkov, Alexandr
  • Töyli, Juuso

Abstract

Internet of things (IoT) brings new opportunities and represents a new source of welfare and efficiency. However, the emerging consumer IoT platform competition creates the risk of monopoly power due to network effects. Overall, it is likely that both competition (incentivized through lowering consumer switching costs) and cooperation (achieved through interoperability, which enables data portability and service provider multihoming) are needed to maximize social welfare. This article aims to address how consumer switching costs and provider multihoming affect competition of emerging consumer IoT data platforms under different market conditions and regulatory schemes. It utilizes agent-based modelling that is especially suitable when decision making is distributed at a micro level while some rules are applied in a centralized fashion. The obtained findings emphasize the role of the regulator in guiding the market. It seems that when switching costs diminish at all sides of the platforms, consumers and service providers will favour the platform with a higher number of users. Further, service provider multihoming mitigates market concentration on both sides of a platform when switching costs are low. Thus, there seems to be a minimum level of interoperability needed to promote market competition. Further, although data portability gives more freedom to consumers in choosing a platform provider, it may result in a winner-takes-all situation due to strong indirect network effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Basaure, Arturo & Vesselkov, Alexandr & Töyli, Juuso, 2020. "Internet of things (IoT) platform competition: Consumer switching versus provider multihoming," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 90.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:90-91:y:2020:i::s0166497218305303
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2019.102101
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497218305303
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2019.102101?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ruutu, Sampsa & Casey, Thomas & Kotovirta, Ville, 2017. "Development and competition of digital service platforms: A system dynamics approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 119-130.
    2. B. Curtis Eaton & Richard G. Lipsey, 1975. "The Principle of Minimum Differentiation Reconsidered: Some New Developments in the Theory of Spatial Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 42(1), pages 27-49.
    3. Belleflamme, Paul & Peitz, Martin, 2019. "Platform competition: Who benefits from multihoming?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-26.
    4. Doganoglu, Toker & Wright, Julian, 2006. "Multihoming and compatibility," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 45-67, January.
    5. Michele Tertilt & Matthias Doepke & Anne Hannusch & Laura Montenbruck, "undated". "The Economics of Woman's Rights The Mary Paley and Alfred Marshall Lecture," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr22401_2018, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    6. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2006. "Two-Sided Competition of Proprietary vs. Open Source Technology Platforms and the Implications for the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1057-1071, July.
    7. Lyn Squire, 1973. "Some Aspects of Optimal Pricing for Telecommunications," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 4(2), pages 515-525, Autumn.
    8. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 990-1029, June.
    9. Sun Mingchun & Tse Edison, 2007. "When Does the Winner Take All in Two-Sided Markets?," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-25, March.
    10. Nicholas Economides, 1986. "Nash Equilibrium in Duopoly with Products Defined by Two Characteristics," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(3), pages 431-439, Autumn.
    11. E. Glen Weyl, 2010. "A Price Theory of Multi-sided Platforms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1642-1672, September.
    12. Kevin J. Boudreau & Andrei Hagiu, 2009. "Platform Rules: Multi-Sided Platforms as Regulators," Chapters, in: Annabelle Gawer (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Basaure, Arturo & Suomi, Henna & Hämmäinen, Heikki, 2016. "Transaction vs. switching costs—Comparison of three core mechanisms for mobile markets," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 545-566.
    14. Robin S. Lee, 2013. "Vertical Integration and Exclusivity in Platform and Two-Sided Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(7), pages 2960-3000, December.
    15. Veendorp, E. C. H. & Majeed, Anjum, 1995. "Differentiation in a two-dimensional market," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 75-83, February.
    16. Jeffrey Rohlfs, 1974. "A Theory of Interdependent Demand for a Communications Service," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 5(1), pages 16-37, Spring.
    17. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    18. Felix Wortmann & Kristina Flüchter, 2015. "Internet of Things," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 57(3), pages 221-224, June.
    19. Stephen C. Littlechild, 1975. "Two-Park Tariffs and Consumption Externalities," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 6(2), pages 661-670, Autumn.
    20. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1992. "Product Introduction with Network Externalities," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 55-83, March.
    21. Schiff, Aaron, 2003. "Open and closed systems of two-sided networks," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 425-442, December.
    22. Corts, Kenneth S. & Lederman, Mara, 2009. "Software exclusivity and the scope of indirect network effects in the U.S. home video game market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 121-136, March.
    23. Klemperer, Paul D, 1987. "Entry Deterrence in Markets with Consumer Switching Costs," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(388a), pages 99-117, Supplemen.
    24. Jean‐Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2006. "Two‐sided markets: a progress report," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 645-667, September.
    25. Mitomo, Hitoshi, 2017. "Data Network Effects: Implications for Data Business," 28th European Regional ITS Conference, Passau 2017 169484, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    26. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    27. Geoffrey G. Parker & Marshall W. Van Alstyne, 2005. "Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(10), pages 1494-1504, October.
    28. Rodolphe Durand & Robert M. Grant & Tammy L. Madsen & David P. McIntyre & Arati Srinivasan, 2017. "Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 141-160, January.
    29. Carliss Y. Baldwin & C. Jason Woodard, 2009. "The Architecture of Platforms: A Unified View," Chapters, in: Annabelle Gawer (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    30. Mark Armstrong & Julian Wright, 2007. "Two-sided Markets, Competitive Bottlenecks and Exclusive Contracts," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 32(2), pages 353-380, August.
    31. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
    32. Michael G. Jacobides & Carmelo Cennamo & Annabelle Gawer, 2018. "Towards a theory of ecosystems," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(8), pages 2255-2276, August.
    33. Swann, G. M. Peter, 2002. "The functional form of network effects," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 417-429, September.
    34. Paul Klemperer, 1987. "Markets with Consumer Switching Costs," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(2), pages 375-394.
    35. Usero Sánchez, Belén & Asimakopoulos, Grigorios, 2012. "Regulation and competition in the European mobile communications industry: An examination of the implementation of mobile number portability," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 187-196.
    36. Neil Gandal, 2002. "Compatibility, Standardization, and Network Effects: Some Policy Implications," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 18(1), pages 80-91, Spring.
    37. Belleflamme, Paul & Peitz, Martin, 2017. "Platform competition : who benefits from multihoming?," Working Papers 17-05, University of Mannheim, Department of Economics.
    38. Evans David S. & Schmalensee Richard, 2010. "Failure to Launch: Critical Mass in Platform Businesses," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 9(4), pages 1-28, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tian, Jiamian & Coreynen, Wim & Matthyssens, Paul & Shen, Lei, 2022. "Platform-based servitization and business model adaptation by established manufacturers," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    2. Culot, Giovanna & Orzes, Guido & Sartor, Marco & Nassimbeni, Guido, 2020. "The future of manufacturing: A Delphi-based scenario analysis on Industry 4.0," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    3. Jovanovic, Marin & Sjödin, David & Parida, Vinit, 2022. "Co-evolution of platform architecture, platform services, and platform governance: Expanding the platform value of industrial digital platforms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    4. Saravanan Periyasami & Aravin Prince Periyasamy, 2022. "Metaverse as Future Promising Platform Business Model: Case Study on Fashion Value Chain," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-21, November.
    5. Mosterd, Lars & Sobota, Vladimir C.M. & van de Kaa, Geerten & Ding, Aaron Yi & de Reuver, Mark, 2021. "Context dependent trade-offs around platform-to-platform openness: The case of the Internet of Things," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    6. Tikas, Gaurav Dilip, 2023. "Team innovation capability: Scale development and validation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    7. Saravanan Periyasami & Aravin Prince Periyasamy, 2022. "Metaverse as Future Promising Platform Business Model: Case Study on Fashion Value Chain," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-19, November.
    8. Bartoloni, Sara & Calò, Ernesto & Marinelli, Luca & Pascucci, Federica & Dezi, Luca & Carayannis, Elias & Revel, Gian Marco & Gregori, Gian Luca, 2022. "Towards designing society 5.0 solutions: The new Quintuple Helix - Design Thinking approach to technology," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    9. Singh, Neeraj & Kumar, Niraj & Kapoor, Sanjeev, 2022. "Consumer multihoming predisposition on food platforms: Does gender matter?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jullien, Bruno & Pavan, Alessandro & Rysman, Marc, 2021. "Two-sided Markets, Pricing, and Network Effects," TSE Working Papers 21-1238, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    2. Xing Wan & Javier Cenamor & Geoffrey Parker & Marshall Van Alstyne, 2017. "Unraveling Platform Strategies: A Review from an Organizational Ambidexterity Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Juan Manuel Sanchez‐Cartas & Gonzalo León, 2021. "Multisided Platforms And Markets: A Survey Of The Theoretical Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 452-487, April.
    4. Basaure, Arturo & Vesselkov, Alexandr, 2018. "Internet of things (IoT) platform competition: consumer switching versus provider multihoming," 22nd ITS Biennial Conference, Seoul 2018. Beyond the boundaries: Challenges for business, policy and society 190352, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    5. Yue Liu & Rong Luo, 2023. "Network Effects and Multinetwork Sellers’ Dynamic Pricing in the U.S. Smartphone Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3297-3318, June.
    6. Carmelo Cennamo & Hakan Ozalp & Tobias Kretschmer, 2018. "Platform Architecture and Quality Trade-offs of Multihoming Complements," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 461-478, June.
    7. Jan Frederic Nerbel & Markus Kreutzer, 2023. "Digital platform ecosystems in flux: From proprietary digital platforms to wide-spanning ecosystems," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-20, December.
    8. Cenamor, Javier, 2021. "Complementor competitive advantage: A framework for strategic decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 335-343.
    9. Jingtao Yi & Jinqiu He & Lihong Yang, 2019. "Platform heterogeneity, platform governance and complementors’ product performance: an empirical study of the mobile application industry," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    10. Jørgen Veisdal, 2020. "The dynamics of entry for digital platforms in two-sided markets: a multi-case study," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(3), pages 539-556, September.
    11. Calvano, Emilio & Polo, Michele, 2021. "Market power, competition and innovation in digital markets: A survey," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    12. Martin Poniatowski & Hedda Lüttenberg & Daniel Beverungen & Dennis Kundisch, 2022. "Three layers of abstraction: a conceptual framework for theorizing digital multi-sided platforms," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 257-283, June.
    13. Xie, Jiaping & Zhu, Weijun & Wei, Lihong & Liang, Ling, 2021. "Platform competition with partial multi-homing: When both same-side and cross-side network effects exist," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    14. Tavalaei, M. Mahdi, 2020. "Waiting time in two-sided platforms: The case of the airport industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    15. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    16. David S. Evans & Richard Schmalensee, 2013. "The Antitrust Analysis of Multi-Sided Platform Businesses," NBER Working Papers 18783, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Burcu Tan & Edward G. Anderson, Jr. & Geoffrey G. Parker, 2020. "Platform Pricing and Investment to Drive Third-Party Value Creation in Two-Sided Networks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 217-239, March.
    18. Jullien, Bruno & Sand-Zantman, Wilfried, 2021. "The Economics of Platforms: A Theory Guide for Competition Policy," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    19. Inoue, Yuki, 2021. "Indirect innovation management by platform ecosystem governance and positioning: Toward collective ambidexterity in the ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    20. Maruyama Masayoshi & Zennyo Yusuke, 2013. "Compatibility and the Product Life Cycle in Two-Sided Markets," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 131-155, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:90-91:y:2020:i::s0166497218305303. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.