IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v52y2023i6s0048733323000446.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory standards and consequences for industry architecture: The case of UK Open Banking

Author

Listed:
  • Dinçkol, Dize
  • Ozcan, Pinar
  • Zachariadis, Markos

Abstract

In this inductive qualitative study, we analyze the standardization efforts in the UK banking sector via Open Banking regulations. We examine the role of regulatory standards and how these standards evolve, highlight key decisions and factors in the process of standardization, and show how the standards implementation can lead to the emergence of new roles and connections in the industry architecture. We find that standardization is a continuous, multi-stakeholder process where not only formulation decisions, but also the adjustment of industry players to roadblocks in implementation cause recalibration of standards and shifts in industry architecture. We also unravel the architectural implications of data sharing and interoperability standardization both within and across industries.

Suggested Citation

  • Dinçkol, Dize & Ozcan, Pinar & Zachariadis, Markos, 2023. "Regulatory standards and consequences for industry architecture: The case of UK Open Banking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:52:y:2023:i:6:s0048733323000446
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2023.104760
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733323000446
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104760?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. Gruber, Harald & Verboven, Frank, 2001. "The evolution of markets under entry and standards regulation -- the case of global mobile telecommunications," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(7), pages 1189-1212, July.
    2. 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.
    3. Satish Nambisan, 2017. "Digital Entrepreneurship: Toward a Digital Technology Perspective of Entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 41(6), pages 1029-1055, November.
    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. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2016. "Innovation ecosystems and the pace of substitution: Re-examining technology S-curves," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 625-648, April.
    6. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    7. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2006. "The Architecture of Participation: Does Code Architecture Mitigate Free Riding in the Open Source Development Model?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1116-1127, July.
    8. Wiegmann, Paul Moritz & de Vries, Henk J. & Blind, Knut, 2017. "Multi-mode standardisation: A critical review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1370-1386.
    9. 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.
    10. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1988. "Coordination through Committees and Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 235-252, Summer.
    11. Petra Christmann & Glen Taylor, 2006. "Firm self-regulation through international certifiable standards: determinants of symbolic versus substantive implementation," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 37(6), pages 863-878, November.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Funk, Jeffrey L., 2003. "Standards, dominant designs and preferential acquisition of complementary assets through slight information advantages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1325-1341, September.
    15. Tassey, Gregory, 2000. "Standardization in technology-based markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 587-602, April.
    16. Funk, Jeffrey L. & Methe, David T., 2001. "Market- and committee-based mechanisms in the creation and diffusion of global industry standards: the case of mobile communication," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 589-610, April.
    17. Constance E. Helfat & Marvin B. Lieberman, 2002. "The birth of capabilities: market entry and the importance of pre-history," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(4), pages 725-760, August.
    18. Ho, Jae-Yun & O'Sullivan, Eoin, 2017. "Strategic standardisation of smart systems: A roadmapping process in support of innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 301-312.
    19. 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.
    20. Bronwyn H. Hall & Beethika Khan, 2003. "Adoption of New Technology," NBER Working Papers 9730, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Michael G. Jacobides, 2008. "Playing football in a soccer field: value chain structures, institutional modularity and success in foreign expansion," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2-3), pages 257-276.
    22. Richard Hawkins & Knut Blind, 2017. "Introduction: unravelling the relationship between standards and innovation," Chapters, in: Richard Hawkins & Knut Blind & Robert Page (ed.), Handbook of Innovation and Standards, chapter 1, pages 1-18, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    23. Blind, Knut & Mangelsdorf, Axel, 2016. "Motives to standardize: Empirical evidence from Germany," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 13-24.
    24. Timothy Simcoe, 2012. "Standard Setting Committees: Consensus Governance for Shared Technology Platforms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 305-336, February.
    25. de Vries, Henk J. & Verhagen, W. Pieter, 2016. "Impact of changes in regulatory performance standards on innovation: A case of energy performance standards for newly-built houses," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 56-68.
    26. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1986. "Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 822-841, August.
    27. 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.
    28. Amrit Tiwana, 2008. "Does technological modularity substitute for control? A study of alliance performance in software outsourcing," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(7), pages 769-780, July.
    29. Bergek, Anna & Jacobsson, Staffan & Carlsson, Bo & Lindmark, Sven & Rickne, Annika, 2008. "Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 407-429, April.
    30. Masucci, Monica & Brusoni, Stefano & Cennamo, Carmelo, 2020. "Removing bottlenecks in business ecosystems: The strategic role of outbound open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    31. 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.
    32. Aija Elina Leiponen, 2008. "Competing Through Cooperation: The Organization of Standard Setting in Wireless Telecommunications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1904-1919, November.
    33. Blind, Knut & Petersen, Sören S. & Riillo, Cesare A.F., 2017. "The impact of standards and regulation on innovation in uncertain markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 249-264.
    34. 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.
    35. Michael E. Porter & Claas van der Linde, 1995. "Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 97-118, Fall.
    36. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Wiegmann, Paul Moritz & de Vries, Henk J. & Blind, Knut, 2017. "Multi-mode standardisation: A critical review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1370-1386.
    2. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    3. Hu, Yefei & Liu, Dayong, 2022. "Government as a non-financial participant in innovation: How standardization led by government promotes regional innovation performance in China," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Hou, Hong & Shi, Yongjiang, 2021. "Ecosystem-as-structure and ecosystem-as-coevolution: A constructive examination," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    7. Uzunca, Bilgehan & Sharapov, Dmitry & Tee, Richard, 2022. "Governance rigidity, industry evolution, and value capture in platform ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    8. Kim, Dongwook & Kim, Sungbum, 2022. "How do standards committees affect the success of a standard? Comparative analysis of RCS and VoLTE and proposed hybrid standards development model of open and bandwagon approaches," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8).
    9. Wen, Wen & Forman, Chris & Jarvenpaa, Sirkka L, 2022. "The effects of technology standards on complementor innovations: Evidence from the IETF," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    10. Deng, Xin & Li, Qian Cher & Mateut, Simona, 2022. "Participation in setting technology standards and the implied cost of equity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(5).
    11. Freimuth, Claudia & Oelmann, Mark & Amann, Erwin, 2018. "Development and prospects of standardization in the German municipal wastewater sector: Version 1.0," IBES Diskussionsbeiträge 223, University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute of Business and Economic Studie (IBES).
    12. 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.
    13. Cenamor, Javier, 2021. "Complementor competitive advantage: A framework for strategic decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 335-343.
    14. 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.
    15. Thomas, Llewellyn D.W. & Autio, Erkko & Gann, David M., 2022. "Processes of ecosystem emergence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    16. Dan, Sujan M., 2019. "How interface formats gain market acceptance: The role of developers and format characteristics in the development of de facto standards," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    17. Hussinger, Katrin & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "The value of disclosing IPR to open standard setting organizations," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-060, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. Foucart, Renaud & Li, Qian Cher, 2021. "The role of technology standards in product innovation: Theory and evidence from UK manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    19. Masucci, Monica & Brusoni, Stefano & Cennamo, Carmelo, 2020. "Removing bottlenecks in business ecosystems: The strategic role of outbound open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    20. 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.

    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:52:y:2023:i:6:s0048733323000446. 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.