IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i19p11954-d921802.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Profit Framework Model for Digital Platforms Based on Value Sharing and Resource Complementarity

Author

Listed:
  • Tianyu Deng

    (School of Business, Southwest Minzu University, Chengdu 610041, China)

  • Limeng Qiao

    (School of Business, Southwest Minzu University, Chengdu 610041, China)

  • Xun Yao

    (School of Business, Southwest Minzu University, Chengdu 610041, China)

  • Shuangying Chen

    (School of Economics and Management, University of Electronic Science and Technology, Chengdu 611731, China)

  • Xiaowo Tang

    (School of Economics and Management, University of Electronic Science and Technology, Chengdu 611731, China)

Abstract

With the advent of the smart economy, Chinese digital platform companies have begun the process of digital innovation. The sudden outbreak of the COVID-19 epidemic in early 2020 has added a strong impulse to the acceleration of this process, highlighting the unique characteristics of the platform economy in resource allocation. Although digital platforms have already entered people’s daily lives, the profit mechanism of digital platforms remains a black box to be cracked for the industry. The main contribution of this paper is to propose a framework model for the profit mechanism of digital platforms, which to a certain extent solves the problems essential to the digital realm faced by many traditional enterprises in the Internet age—knowing that the profit theory of traditional monopolies is not suitable for the rapidly changing internet economy, but that most of the time people still must use it. In this new profit framework, we first use the symbiotic logic of value sharing to explain the underlying logic of platform profitability; secondly, from the perspective of resource complementarity, we find that the key to digital platform companies’ profitability lies in the symbiotic synergy between platform companies and massive userbases; lastly, our study finds that the profit condition of platform enterprises is digital capability, not system possession. This article will analyze the bottom layer of the digital economy and, by identifying the various drawbacks of the traditional industrial economic monopoly theory, propose three key factors for the profitability of platform companies in the digital age: flexible strategy, digital capabilities, and symbiotic synergy capabilities. On this basis, a theoretical model of the profit of a digital platform is constructed. Research shows that the hybrid structure of digital platforms and the need for external diversification together lead to a platform’s resilience strategy. The realization process of the platform’s strategic flexibility and the process of consumers obtaining the residual value will lead to an explosion in network effects, causing the platform and users to complete value co-creation and realize value sharing. The implementation of a flexible platform strategy also promotes the further development of a differentiation strategy and a more-refined division of labor for manufacturers, lowers the barriers-to-entry in the industry, and enables the platform and the manufacturers to realize value co-creation. On the one hand, platform enterprises can obtain greater market performance; on the other hand, users’ personalized needs can be more satisfied.

Suggested Citation

  • Tianyu Deng & Limeng Qiao & Xun Yao & Shuangying Chen & Xiaowo Tang, 2022. "A Profit Framework Model for Digital Platforms Based on Value Sharing and Resource Complementarity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:11954-:d:921802
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/11954/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/11954/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Kira R. Fabrizio & L. G. Thomas, 2012. "The Impact of Local Demand on Innovation in a Global Industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 42-64, January.
    3. Brunswicker, Sabine & Schecter, Aaron, 2019. "Coherence or flexibility? The paradox of change for developers’ digital innovation trajectory on open platforms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    4. Amrit Tiwana & Benn Konsynski, 2010. "Complementarities Between Organizational IT Architecture and Governance Structure," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 288-304, June.
    5. Mark De Reuver & Harry Bouwman & Timber Haaker, 2013. "Business Model Roadmapping: A Practical Approach To Come From An Existing To A Desired Business Model," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-18.
    6. Zobel, Ann-Kristin & Lokshin, Boris & Hagedoorn, John, 2017. "Formal and informal appropriation mechanisms: The role of openness and innovativeness," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 44-54.
    7. Boudreau, Kevin J. & Lakhani, Karim R., 2015. "“Open” disclosure of innovations, incentives and follow-on reuse: Theory on processes of cumulative innovation and a field experiment in computational biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 4-19.
    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. Walter, Achim & Auer, Michael & Ritter, Thomas, 2006. "The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 541-567, July.
    10. de Reuver, Mark & Sørensen, Carsten & Basole, Rahul C., 2018. "The digital platform: a research agenda," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 80669, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Rahul Kapoor & Shiva Agarwal, 2017. "Sustaining Superior Performance in Business Ecosystems: Evidence from Application Software Developers in the iOS and Android Smartphone Ecosystems," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 531-551, June.
    12. Steve Elliot, 2013. "A Transdisciplinary Exploratory Model of Corporate Responses to the Challenges of Environmental Sustainability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 269-282, May.
    13. Jeffrey H. Dyer & Harbir Singh & William S. Hesterly, 2018. "The relational view revisited: A dynamic perspective on value creation and value capture," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(12), pages 3140-3162, December.
    14. Amrit Tiwana, 2015. "Evolutionary Competition in Platform Ecosystems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 266-281, June.
    15. Feng Zhu & Qihong Liu, 2018. "Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 2618-2642, October.
    16. 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.
    17. Şimşek, Tolga & Öner, M Atilla & Kunday, Özlem & Olcay, Gökçen Arkalı, 2022. "A journey towards a digital platform business model: A case study in a global tech-company," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    18. Kafouros, Mario & Wang, Chengqi & Piperopoulos, Panagiotis & Zhang, Mingshen, 2015. "Academic collaborations and firm innovation performance in China: The role of region-specific institutions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 803-817.
    19. Frederik von Briel & Per Davidsson & Jan Recker, 2018. "Digital Technologies as External Enablers of New Venture Creation in the IT Hardware Sector," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 42(1), pages 47-69, January.
    20. Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy & Anna Roberts & Le Xu, 2022. "Liminal movement by digital platform‐based sharing economy ventures: The case of Uber Technologies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 447-475, March.
    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. Hongxia Zhao & Guangming Xu & Lu Liu & Changchun Shi & Huijuan Zhao, 2023. "Low-Carbon Technology Innovation Decision Making of Manufacturing Companies in the Industrial Internet Platform Ecosystem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Sun, Qiao & Wang, Chang & Zhou, Yifang & Zuo, Lyushui & Song, Huiling, 2023. "How to build business ecosystems for e-waste online recycling platforms: A comparative study of two typical cases in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    3. Lihua Jiang & Wei Chen & Shichang Lu & Zhaoxiang Chen, 2022. "Regulatory Effect on Information Sharing of Industrial Internet Platforms Based on Three Differentiated Game Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-25, December.

    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. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    2. Andreas Hein & Maximilian Schreieck & Tobias Riasanow & David Soto Setzke & Manuel Wiesche & Markus Böhm & Helmut Krcmar, 2020. "Digital platform ecosystems," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(1), pages 87-98, March.
    3. Fabian Schueler & Dimitri Petrik, 2022. "Objectives of platform research: A co-citation and systematic literature review analysis," Papers 2202.08822, arXiv.org.
    4. 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.
    5. Cenamor, Javier, 2021. "Complementor competitive advantage: A framework for strategic decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 335-343.
    6. 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).
    7. Xuelin Chen & Dongmei Zhou & Ziying Zhan & Ruoyu Lu, 2023. "When Do You Enter? Entrepreneurial Firms’ Entry Timing and Product Performance in the Digital Platform Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    8. Hou, Hong & Shi, Yongjiang, 2021. "Ecosystem-as-structure and ecosystem-as-coevolution: A constructive examination," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    9. 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).
    10. Liu, Yang & Dong, Jiuyu & Mei, Liang & Shen, Rui, 2023. "Digital innovation and performance of manufacturing firms: An affordance perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    11. 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.
    12. Zoltan J. Acs & Abraham K. Song & László Szerb & David B. Audretsch & Éva Komlósi, 2021. "The evolution of the global digital platform economy: 1971–2021," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 1629-1659, December.
    13. Najda-Janoszka, Marta, 2018. "Towards Platform Defined Business – Complementarity at the Spotlight," MPRA Paper 87440, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Constance E. Helfat & Aseem Kaul & David J. Ketchen & Jay B. Barney & Olivier Chatain & Harbir Singh, 2023. "Renewing the resource‐based view: New contexts, new concepts, and new methods," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(6), pages 1357-1390, June.
    15. Jiatao Li & Liang Chen & Jingtao Yi & Jiye Mao & Jianwen Liao, 2019. "Ecosystem-specific advantages in international digital commerce," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(9), pages 1448-1463, December.
    16. Joost Rietveld & J. P. Eggers, 2018. "Demand Heterogeneity in Platform Markets: Implications for Complementors," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 304-322, April.
    17. Abraham K. Song, 2019. "The Digital Entrepreneurial Ecosystem—a critique and reconfiguration," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 569-590, October.
    18. Kang, Hye Young, 2022. "Technological engagement of women entrepreneurs on online digital platforms: Evidence from the Apple iOS App Store," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    19. Kapoor, Kawaljeet & Ziaee Bigdeli, Ali & Dwivedi, Yogesh K. & Schroeder, Andreas & Beltagui, Ahmad & Baines, Tim, 2021. "A socio-technical view of platform ecosystems: Systematic review and research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 94-108.
    20. Jean-Michel Sahut & Luca Iandoli & Frédéric Teulon, 2021. "The age of digital entrepreneurship," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1159-1169, February.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:11954-:d:921802. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.