IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/elmark/v32y2022i2d10.1007_s12525-021-00495-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The emergence and evolution of a disruptive platform ecosystem: evidence from the Indian mobile services industry

Author

Listed:
  • Sandip Mukhopadhyay

    (Institute of Management Technology (IMT))

  • Jason Whalley

    (Northumbria University)

Abstract

The successful emergence of a disruptive platform in a contested industry is fraught with many challenges. The extant literature focuses on the challenges faced by the established platforms or the growth and inception of regular platforms, highlighting the need for understanding the dilemmas faced by a entrant disruptive platform. Our study sheds light on this phenomenon in an exploratory in-depth case study analysing the emergence of Jio Platform, an India based green-field platform providing mobile and digital services. Our analysis charts the disruptor's actions to navigate challenges posed by the incumbents and its own advanced technology. We demonstrate that the disruptive entrant initiated three strategic actions to overcome its ‘disruptor’s dilemma’: active market development for complement products, using strong complementors as force multipliers and effective usage of framing to secure legitimacy and support. The analysis also highlights how the strategy adopted by Jio evolved over time, as well as the difficulties of mapping this onto the existing understanding of the literature. By focusing on the intersection of the platform and disruptive innovation literature we identify managerial implications and a source of propositions for researchers, investigating the growth of the disruptive platform and its impact on the ecosystem.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandip Mukhopadhyay & Jason Whalley, 2022. "The emergence and evolution of a disruptive platform ecosystem: evidence from the Indian mobile services industry," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(2), pages 669-686, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:elmark:v:32:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s12525-021-00495-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s12525-021-00495-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12525-021-00495-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12525-021-00495-y?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. Rainer Alt & Hans-Dieter Zimmermann, 2019. "Electronic Markets on platform competition," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(2), pages 143-149, June.
    2. Andreas Hein & Maximilian Schreieck & Manuel Wiesche & Markus Böhm & Helmut Krcmar, 2019. "The emergence of native multi-sided platforms and their influence on incumbents," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(4), pages 631-647, December.
    3. Amrit Tiwana & Benn Konsynski & Ashley A. Bush, 2010. "Research Commentary ---Platform Evolution: Coevolution of Platform Architecture, Governance, and Environmental Dynamics," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 675-687, December.
    4. Cenamor, Javier & Frishammar, Johan, 2021. "Openness in platform ecosystems: Innovation strategies for complementary products," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    5. Christine A. Barry, 1998. "Choosing Qualitative Data Analysis Software: Atlas/ti and Nudist Compared," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 3(3), pages 16-28, September.
    6. Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari & Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 2016. "The disruptor's dilemma: TiVo and the U.S. television ecosystem," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(9), pages 1829-1853, September.
    7. Yuliya Snihur & Llewellyn D. W. Thomas & Robert A. Burgelman, 2018. "An Ecosystem‐Level Process Model of Business Model Disruption: The Disruptor's Gambit," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1278-1316, November.
    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. Michael Lounsbury & Mary Ann Glynn, 2001. "Cultural entrepreneurship: stories, legitimacy, and the acquisition of resources," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 545-564, June.
    10. Rahul Kapoor, 2018. "Ecosystems: broadening the locus of value creation," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 7(1), pages 1-16, December.
    11. Robert A Burgelman, 2011. "Bridging history and reductionism: A key role for longitudinal qualitative research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 42(5), pages 591-601, June.
    12. 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.
    13. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    14. David S. Evans, 2009. "How Catalysts Ignite: The Economics of Platform-Based Start-Ups," Chapters, in: Annabelle Gawer (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Arun Kumaraswamy & Raghu Garud & Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari, 2018. "Perspectives on Disruptive Innovations," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1025-1042, November.
    16. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    17. Hakan Ozalp & Carmelo Cennamo & Annabelle Gawer, 2018. "Disruption in Platform‐Based Ecosystems," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1203-1241, November.
    18. Ansari, Shahzad (Shaz) & Krop, Pieter, 2012. "Incumbent performance in the face of a radical innovation: Towards a framework for incumbent challenger dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1357-1374.
    19. Raghu Garud & Henri A. Schildt & Theresa K. Lant, 2014. "Entrepreneurial Storytelling, Future Expectations, and the Paradox of Legitimacy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1479-1492, October.
    20. Douglas P. Hannah & Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 2018. "How firms navigate cooperation and competition in nascent ecosystems," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(12), pages 3163-3192, December.
    21. Snihur, Yuliya & Thomas, Llewellyn D. W. & Burgelman, Robert A., 2018. "An Ecosystem-Level Process Model of Business Model Disruption: The Disruptor's Gambit," Research Papers 3662, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    22. Peter Curwen & Jason Whalley & Pierre Vialle, 2019. "Disruptive activity in a regulated industry : the case of telecommunications," Post-Print hal-02333241, HAL.
    23. Trabucchi, Daniel & Talenti, Luca & Buganza, Tommaso, 2019. "How do Big Bang Disruptors look like? A Business Model perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 330-340.
    24. Kim, Moon-Koo & Park, Myeong-Cheol & Jeong, Dong-Heon, 2004. "The effects of customer satisfaction and switching barrier on customer loyalty in Korean mobile telecommunication services," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 145-159, March.
    25. Burgelman, Robert A., 2011. "Bridging History and Reductionism: A Key Role for Longitudinal Qualitative Research," Research Papers 2045r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    26. Kevin J. Boudreau & Lars B. Jeppesen, 2015. "Unpaid crowd complementors: The platform network effect mirage," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(12), pages 1761-1777, December.
    27. Eaton, Ben & Elaluf-Calderwood, Silvia & Sorensen, Carsten & Yoo, Youngjin, 2015. "Distributed tuning of boundary resources: the case of Apple's iOS service system," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 63272, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    28. 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.
    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. Rainer Alt, 2022. "Electronic Markets on platform transformation," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(2), pages 401-409, June.

    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. 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.
    2. Saeed Khanagha & Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari & Sotirios Paroutis & Luciano Oviedo, 2022. "Mutualism and the dynamics of new platform creation: A study of Cisco and fog computing," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 476-506, March.
    3. Hou, Hong & Shi, Yongjiang, 2021. "Ecosystem-as-structure and ecosystem-as-coevolution: A constructive examination," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    4. Bixiang Shi & Fangcheng Tang & Fenfen Wei, 2022. "The Path Constitution of Platform Evolution: An Organizational Momentum View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, July.
    5. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    6. Uzunca, Bilgehan & Sharapov, Dmitry & Tee, Richard, 2022. "Governance rigidity, industry evolution, and value capture in platform ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    7. 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.
    8. Petzold, Neele & Schmidt, Alexander Lennart & Scaringella, Laurent, 2023. "How to overcome the disruptor's dilemma: Exploring strategic alliance reconfiguration of new market entrants," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    9. Yuliya Snihur & Llewellyn D. W. Thomas & Raghu Garud & Nelson Phillips, 2022. "Entrepreneurial Framing: A Literature Review and Future Research Directions," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 46(3), pages 578-606, May.
    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. Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari & Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 2016. "The disruptor's dilemma: TiVo and the U.S. television ecosystem," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(9), pages 1829-1853, September.
    12. Thomas, Llewellyn D.W. & Autio, Erkko & Gann, David M., 2022. "Processes of ecosystem emergence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    13. Fabian Schueler & Dimitri Petrik, 2022. "Objectives of platform research: A co-citation and systematic literature review analysis," Papers 2202.08822, arXiv.org.
    14. Joachim Stonig & Torsten Schmid & Günter Müller‐Stewens, 2022. "From product system to ecosystem: How firms adapt to provide an integrated value proposition," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(9), pages 1927-1957, September.
    15. Gomes, Leonardo Augusto de Vasconcelos & Flechas, Ximena Alejandra & Facin, Ana Lucia Figueiredo & Borini, Felipe Mendes, 2021. "Ecosystem management: Past achievements and future promises," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    16. Jabbour, Chady & Rey-Valette, Hélène & Maurel, Pierre & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2019. "Spatial data infrastructure management: A two-sided market approach for strategic reflections," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 69-82.
    17. 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).
    18. 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.
    19. Nizar Abdelkafi & Christina Raasch & Angela Roth & R. Srinivasan, 2019. "Multi-sided platforms," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(4), pages 553-559, December.
    20. Saadatmand, Fatemeh & Lindgren, Rikard & Schultze, Ulrike, 2019. "Configurations of platform organizations: Implications for complementor engagement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Disruptive platform; Ecosystem; Complementors; Force multiplier; Framing; Digital services; India;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
    • D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:elmark:v:32:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s12525-021-00495-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.