IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v51y2022i7s0048733322000841.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governance rigidity, industry evolution, and value capture in platform ecosystems

Author

Listed:
  • Uzunca, Bilgehan
  • Sharapov, Dmitry
  • Tee, Richard

Abstract

Existing work has shown how, in platform ecosystems, firms can capture above-average rents by controlling hard-to-replace segments. However, initial conditions can have a lasting effect on a platform owner's ability to capture value as the ecosystem in which it operates evolves. We develop a theoretical framework that first considers the role of bargaining power and industry life cycle stage, showing how these shape initial governance arrangements and the platform owner's subsequent ability to capture value based on the rigidity of these arrangements. We then develop propositions, focusing on contingencies that moderate this degree of governance rigidity in platform ecosystems. Our framework helps understand the combined effects of initial conditions and governance rigidity as key drivers of a platform owner's ability to capture rents. Once we consider these dynamics, controlling a hard-to-replace segment may neither be sufficient nor necessary to obtain a large share of the value created by an ecosystem.

Suggested Citation

  • Uzunca, Bilgehan & Sharapov, Dmitry & Tee, Richard, 2022. "Governance rigidity, industry evolution, and value capture in platform ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:51:y:2022:i:7:s0048733322000841
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2022.104560
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733322000841
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104560?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. Jonathan Wareham & Paul B. Fox & Josep Lluís Cano Giner, 2014. "Technology Ecosystem Governance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1195-1215, August.
    2. Kimmo Karhu & Robin Gustafsson & Kalle Lyytinen, 2018. "Exploiting and Defending Open Digital Platforms with Boundary Resources: Android’s Five Platform Forks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 479-497, June.
    3. Rodolphe Durand & Robert M. Grant & Tammy L. Madsen & Gino Cattani & Joseph F. Porac & Howard Thomas, 2017. "Categories and competition," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 64-92, January.
    4. Jacobides, Michael G. & Knudsen, Thorbjorn & Augier, Mie, 2006. "Benefiting from innovation: Value creation, value appropriation and the role of industry architectures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1200-1221, October.
    5. Thomas R. Eisenmann & Geoffrey Parker & Marshall Van Alstyne, 2009. "Opening Platforms: How, When and Why?," Chapters, in: Annabelle Gawer (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Giorgio Zanarone & Desmond (Ho-Fu) Lo & Tammy L. Madsen, 2016. "The double-edged effect of knowledge acquisition: How contracts safeguard pre-existing resources," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(10), pages 2104-2120, October.
    7. Michael G. Jacobides & C. Jennifer Tae, 2015. "Kingpins, Bottlenecks, and Value Dynamics Along a Sector," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 889-907, June.
    8. Teece, David J., 2018. "Profiting from innovation in the digital economy: Enabling technologies, standards, and licensing models in the wireless world," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1367-1387.
    9. 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.
    10. Fabrice Lumineau & Joanne E. Oxley, 2012. "Let's Work It Out (or We'll See You in Court): Litigation and Private Dispute Resolution in Vertical Exchange Relationships," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 820-834, June.
    11. Tianxu Chen & Lihong Qian & Vadake Narayanan, 2017. "Battle on the Wrong Field? Entrant Type, Dominant Designs, and Technology Exit," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(13), pages 2579-2598, December.
    12. Giada Di Stefano & Alfonso Gambardella & Gianmario Verona, 2012. "Technology Push and Demand Pull Perspectives in Innovation Studies: Current Findings and Future Research Directions," Post-Print hal-00696607, HAL.
    13. Klepper, Steven, 1996. "Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 562-583, June.
    14. Pinar Ozcan & Filipe M. Santos, 2015. "The market that never was: Turf wars and failed alliances in mobile payments," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(10), pages 1486-1512, October.
    15. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2010. "Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 306-333, March.
    16. Steven Klepper & Peter Thompson, 2006. "Submarkets and the evolution of market structure," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(4), pages 861-886, December.
    17. Kyle J. Mayer & Nicholas S. Argyres, 2004. "Learning to Contract: Evidence from the Personal Computer Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 394-410, August.
    18. Klepper, Steven, 1997. "Industry Life Cycles," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 6(1), pages 145-181.
    19. Annabelle Gawer, 2009. "Platforms, Markets and Innovation: An Introduction," Chapters, in: Annabelle Gawer (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Clayton M. Christensen & Fernando F. Suárez & James M. Utterback, 1998. "Strategies for Survival in Fast-Changing Industries," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(12-Part-2), pages 207-220, December.
    21. Ron Adner & Daniel Levinthal, 2001. "Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Evolution: Implications for Product and Process Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 611-628, May.
    22. Kenney, Martin & Pon, Bryan, 2011. "Structuring the Smartphone Industry. Is the Mobile Internet OS Platform the Key?," Discussion Papers 1238, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    23. Brice Dattée & Oliver Alexy & Erkko Autio, 2018. "Maneuvering in Poor Visibility : How Firms Play the Ecosystem Game when Uncertainty is High," Post-Print hal-02276702, HAL.
    24. Constance E. Helfat & Miguel A. Campo-Rembado, 2016. "Integrative Capabilities, Vertical Integration, and Innovation Over Successive Technology Lifecycles," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 249-264, April.
    25. Lumineau, Fabrice & Malhotra, Deepak, 2011. "Shadow of the contract: how contract structure shapes inter-firm dispute resolution," MPRA Paper 38359, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    26. Argyres, Nicholas S. & Liebeskind, Julia Porter, 2002. "Governance inseparability and the evolution of US biotechnology industry," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 197-219, February.
    27. Gort, Michael & Klepper, Steven, 1982. "Time Paths in the Diffusion of Product Innovations," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(367), pages 630-653, September.
    28. Michael G. Jacobides & Sidney G. Winter, 2005. "The co‐evolution of capabilities and transaction costs: explaining the institutional structure of production," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 395-413, May.
    29. 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.
    30. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    31. Mary J. Benner & Mary Tripsas, 2012. "The influence of prior industry affiliation on framing in nascent industries: the evolution of digital cameras," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 277-302, March.
    32. Kenney, Martin & von Burg, Urs, 1999. "Technology, Entrepreneurship and Path Dependence: Industrial Clustering in Silicon Valley and Route 128," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 8(1), pages 67-103, March.
    33. CABRAL Luis & HAUCAP Justus & PARKER Geoffrey & PETROPOULOS Georgios & VALLETTI Tommaso & VAN ALSTYNE Marshall, 2021. "The EU Digital Markets Act," JRC Research Reports JRC122910, Joint Research Centre.
    34. Utterback, James M. & Suarez, Fernando F., 1993. "Innovation, competition, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, February.
    35. Janet E. L. Bercovitz & Beverly B. Tyler, 2014. "Who I Am and How I Contract: The Effect of Contractors’ Roles on the Evolution of Contract Structure in University–Industry Research Agreements," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1840-1859, December.
    36. Richard Tee, 2019. "Benefiting from modularity within and across firm boundaries," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(5), pages 1011-1028.
    37. 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.
    38. Nambisan, Satish & Baron, Robert A., 2021. "On the costs of digital entrepreneurship: Role conflict, stress, and venture performance in digital platform-based ecosystems," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 520-532.
    39. 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.
    40. Helfat, Constance E. & Raubitschek, Ruth S., 2018. "Dynamic and integrative capabilities for profiting from innovation in digital platform-based ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1391-1399.
    41. 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.
    42. Annabelle Gawer & Rebecca Henderson, 2007. "Platform Owner Entry and Innovation in Complementary Markets: Evidence from Intel," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 1-34, March.
    43. 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.
    44. Thorbjørn Knudsen & Daniel A. Levinthal & Sidney G. Winter, 2014. "Hidden but in plain sight: The role of scale adjustment in industry dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(11), pages 1569-1584, November.
    45. Martin Kenney & Bryan Pon, 2011. "Structuring the Smartphone Industry: Is the Mobile Internet OS Platform the Key?," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 239-261, September.
    46. 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.
    47. Di Stefano, Giada & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verona, Gianmario, 2012. "Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1283-1295.
    48. Brice Dattée & Oliver Alexy & Erkko Autio, 2018. "Maneuvering in Poor Visibility : How Firms Play the Ecosystem Game when Uncertainty is High," Post-Print hal-02312003, HAL.
    49. Steven Klepper & Peter Thompson, 2006. "Submarkets and the evolution of market structure," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(4), pages 861-886, December.
    50. Africa Ariño & José de la Torre, 1998. "Learning from Failure: Towards an Evolutionary Model of Collaborative Ventures," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 306-325, June.
    51. Tobias Kretschmer & Aija Leiponen & Melissa Schilling & Gurneeta Vasudeva, 2022. "Platform ecosystems as meta‐organizations: Implications for platform strategies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 405-424, March.
    52. Pascale Crama & Bert De Reyck & Niyazi Taneri, 2017. "Licensing Contracts: Control Rights, Options, and Timing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(4), pages 1131-1149, April.
    53. 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.
    54. Jeffrey Funk, 2015. "Industry architecture, the product life cycle, and entrepreneurial opportunities: the case of the US broadcasting sector," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(1), pages 65-91.
    55. Rahul Kapoor, 2013. "Persistence of Integration in the Face of Specialization: How Firms Navigated the Winds of Disintegration and Shaped the Architecture of the Semiconductor Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1195-1213, August.
    56. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    57. Lamar Pierce, 2009. "Big losses in ecosystem niches: how core firm decisions drive complementary product shakeouts," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 323-347, March.
    58. Dovev Lavie, 2007. "Alliance portfolios and firm performance: A study of value creation and appropriation in the U.S. software industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(12), pages 1187-1212, December.
    59. Wen Wen & Feng Zhu, 2019. "Threat of platform‐owner entry and complementor responses: Evidence from the mobile app market," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(9), pages 1336-1367, September.
    60. Youngjin Yoo & Ola Henfridsson & Kalle Lyytinen, 2010. "Research Commentary ---The New Organizing Logic of Digital Innovation: An Agenda for Information Systems Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 724-735, 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. Evgeny V. Popov, 2023. "Firms’ ecosystems: Developing a research programme," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 14(1), pages 2-15, March.
    2. Jovanovic, Marin & Kostić, Nikola & Sebastian, Ina M. & Sedej, Tomaz, 2022. "Managing a blockchain-based platform ecosystem for industry-wide adoption: The case of TradeLens," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(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. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    2. 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.
    3. Thomas, Llewellyn D.W. & Autio, Erkko & Gann, David M., 2022. "Processes of ecosystem emergence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    4. Hou, Hong & Shi, Yongjiang, 2021. "Ecosystem-as-structure and ecosystem-as-coevolution: A constructive examination," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    5. Pinar Ozcan & Douglas Hannah, 2020. "Social Origins of Great Strategies Advertising Suppliers to Realize Disruptive Social Media Technology," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 193-217, September.
    6. Panos Constantinides & Ola Henfridsson & Geoffrey G. Parker, 2018. "Introduction—Platforms and Infrastructures in the Digital Age," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 381-400, June.
    7. Cenamor, Javier & Frishammar, Johan, 2021. "Openness in platform ecosystems: Innovation strategies for complementary products," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    8. 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.
    9. Saadatmand, Fatemeh & Lindgren, Rikard & Schultze, Ulrike, 2019. "Configurations of platform organizations: Implications for complementor engagement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Phillips, Mark A. & Ritala, Paavo, 2019. "A complex adaptive systems agenda for ecosystem research methodology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    13. Cenamor, Javier, 2021. "Complementor competitive advantage: A framework for strategic decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 335-343.
    14. 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).
    15. Han, Jin & Zhou, Haibo & Löwik, Sandor & de Weerd-Nederhof, Petra, 2022. "Building and sustaining emerging ecosystems through new focal ventures: Evidence from China's bike-sharing industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    16. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2022. "The effect of technology and regulation on the co-evolution of product and industry architecture," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(4), pages 1056-1085.
    17. Dedehayir, Ozgur & Mäkinen, Saku J. & Ortt, J. Roland, 2022. "Innovation ecosystems as structures: Actor roles, timing of their entrance, and interactions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    18. Spaniol, Matthew J. & Rowland, Nicholas J., 2022. "Business ecosystems and the view from the future: The use of corporate foresight by stakeholders of the Ro-Ro shipping ecosystem in the Baltic Sea Region," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    19. Michael G. Jacobides & C. Jennifer Tae, 2015. "Kingpins, Bottlenecks, and Value Dynamics Along a Sector," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 889-907, June.
    20. Sean T. Hsu & Susan K. Cohen, 2022. "Overcoming the Incumbent Dilemma: The Dual Roles of Multimarket Contact During Disruption," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 319-348, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Platform ecosystems; Governance rigidity; Industry evolution; Value capture;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D21 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Theory
    • L22 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Organization and Market Structure
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:eee:respol:v:51:y:2022:i:7:s0048733322000841. 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.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.