IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v29y2018i2p498-519.html

Strategic Intellectual Property Sharing: Competition on an Open Technology Platform Under Network Effects

Author

Listed:
  • Marius F. Niculescu

    (Scheller College of Business, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30308)

  • D. J. Wu

    (Scheller College of Business, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30308)

  • Lizhen Xu

    (Scheller College of Business, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30308)

Abstract

In this paper, we explore the strategic decision of an incumbent to open a proprietary technology platform to allow same-side co-opetition in a market characterized by network effects. We propose a game-theoretic model that analytically conceptualizes the interplay among the degree of same-side platform openness, the absorptive capacity of the entrant, and the intensity of network effects. Our analysis uncovers interesting new results. First, when entrant product quality is exogenous, under very strong network effects, the incumbent closes the technology. Moreover, we discuss various interesting open-platform co-opetition outcomes that arise under a fully covered market. When the entrant chooses the quality level and the incumbent is strategic in its platform opening decision, we find that intense network effects make new players shun the market, so intellectual property (IP) sharing is not possible in equilibrium. When the network effects are of intermediate intensity, the incumbent opens the technology to the entrants who have a sufficiently high absorptive capacity, calibrating the amount of sharing to the entrant’s absorptive capacity level to ensure that the duopoly setting is mutually beneficial. Our key findings and insights are robust to several model extensions, including scenarios when the incumbent is uncertain of the entrant’s absorptive capacity, or when the entrant incurs a general non-linear development cost structure. We also compare and contrast bounded versus unbounded market scenarios. We further explore the ability of the incumbent to engineer the strength of network effects in the market and uncover non-trivial alternating-monotonicity patterns for the optimal intensity of network effects with respect to the entrant’s absorptive capacity. We also show that a model with exogenous network effects could drastically underestimate the range of entrants’ absorptive capacity values for which the incumbent should open its platform, causing the latter to miss valuable co-opetition opportunities. We also discuss various managerial implications of our theoretical framework. The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2017.0756 .

Suggested Citation

  • Marius F. Niculescu & D. J. Wu & Lizhen Xu, 2018. "Strategic Intellectual Property Sharing: Competition on an Open Technology Platform Under Network Effects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 498-519, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:29:y:2018:i:2:p:498-519
    DOI: isre.2017.0756
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/isre.2017.0756
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/isre.2017.0756?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Griva, Krina & Vettas, Nikolaos, 2011. "Price competition in a differentiated products duopoly under network effects," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 85-97, March.
    2. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    3. Yifan Dou & Marius F. Niculescu & D. J. Wu, 2013. "Engineering Optimal Network Effects via Social Media Features and Seeding in Markets for Digital Goods and Services," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 164-185, March.
    4. Baohong Sun & Jinhong Xie & H. Henry Cao, 2004. "Product Strategy for Innovators in Markets with Network Effects," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 243-254, October.
    5. Baake, Pio & Boom, Anette, 2001. "Vertical product differentiation, network externalities, and compatibility decisions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 267-284, January.
    6. Kathleen R. Conner, 1995. "Obtaining Strategic Advantage from Being Imitated: When Can Encouraging "Clones" Pay?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 209-225, February.
    7. 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.
    8. Kevin Boudreau, 2010. "Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(10), pages 1849-1872, October.
    9. Luís Cabral, 2011. "Dynamic Price Competition with Network Effects," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 78(1), pages 83-111.
    10. Hsing Kenneth Cheng & Yipeng Liu, 2012. "Optimal Software Free Trial Strategy: The Impact of Network Externalities and Consumer Uncertainty," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 488-504, June.
    11. Gallini, Nancy T, 1984. "Deterrence by Market Sharing: A Strategic Incentive for Licensing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 931-941, December.
    12. Ho-Chyuan Chen & Chien-Chen Chen, 2011. "Compatibility Under Differentiated Duopoly with Network Externalities," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 43-55, March.
    13. 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.
    14. Economides, Nicholas, 1996. "Network externalities, complementarities, and invitations to enter," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 211-233, September.
    15. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    16. Andres Barge-Gil, 2010. "Open, Semi-Open and Closed Innovators: Towards an Explanation of Degree of Openness," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 577-607.
    17. Roy Jones & Haim Mendelson, 2011. "Information Goods vs. Industrial Goods: Cost Structure and Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 164-176, January.
    18. Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 1993. "Changing competitive dynamics in network industries: An exploration of sun microsystems' open systems strategy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 351-369, July.
    19. Rossella Argenziano, 2008. "Differentiated networks: equilibrium and efficiency," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 747-769, September.
    20. Joseph Farrell & Nancy T. Gallini, 1988. "Second-Sourcing as a Commitment: Monopoly Incentives to Attract Competition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 103(4), pages 673-694.
    21. Edward G. Anderson & Geoffrey G. Parker & Burcu Tan, 2014. "Platform Performance Investment in the Presence of Network Externalities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 152-172, March.
    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. Geng Sun & Yeongin Kim & Yinliang (Ricky) Tan & Geoffrey G. Parker, 2024. "Dinner at Your Doorstep: Service Innovation via the Gig Economy on Food Delivery Platforms," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 1216-1234, September.
    2. Qi Wang & Huazhong Zhao & Jinhong Xie, 2016. "Intra-Standard Competition: The Joint Impact of an Installed-User Base and a Supporting-Firm Base in Markets with Network Effects," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 3(3), pages 159-174, December.
    3. Laussel, Didier & Resende, Joana, 2014. "Dynamic price competition in aftermarkets with network effects," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 106-118.
    4. Etziony Amir & Weiss Avi, 2012. "Inviting Competition to Achieve Critical Mass," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(2), pages 1-22, June.
    5. Yi, Yuyin & Yang, Haishen, 2017. "An evolutionary stable strategy for retailers selling complementary goods subject to indirect network externalities," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 184-193.
    6. Cenamor, Javier & Frishammar, Johan, 2021. "Openness in platform ecosystems: Innovation strategies for complementary products," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    7. Frank Borowicz & Ewald Scherm, 2001. "Standardisierungsstrategien: Eine erweiterte Betrachtung des Wettbewerbs auf Netzeffektmärkten," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 391-416, June.
    8. Stremersch, S. & Tellis, G.J. & Franses, Ph.H.B.F. & Binken, J.L.G., 2007. "Indirect Network Effects in New Product Growth," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2007-019-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    9. Hess, Mike & Ricart, Joan E., 2002. "Managing customer switching costs: A framework for competing in the networked environment," IESE Research Papers D/472, IESE Business School.
    10. Jinhyo Joseph Yun & Xiaofei Zhao & KyungBae Park & Lei Shi, 2020. "Sustainability Condition of Open Innovation: Dynamic Growth of Alibaba from SME to Large Enterprise," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-24, May.
    11. Matutes, Carmen & Regibeau, Pierre, 1996. "A selective review of the economics of standardization. Entry deterrence, technological progress and international competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 183-209, September.
    12. Kevin J. Boudreau & Lars Bo Jeppesen & Milan Miric, 2022. "Competing on freemium: Digital competition with network effects," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(7), pages 1374-1401, July.
    13. Fabio Manenti & Ernesto Somma, 2008. "One-Way Compatibility, Two-Way Compatibility and Entry in Network Industries," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 301-322.
    14. Tsuyoshi Toshimitsu, 2018. "Strategic Compatibility Choice, Network Alliance, and Welfare," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 245-252, June.
    15. Guofang Nan & Xingtao Li & Zan Zhang & Minqiang Li, 0. "Optimal pricing for new product entry under free strategy," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-19.
    16. Baohong Sun & Jinhong Xie & H. Henry Cao, 2004. "Product Strategy for Innovators in Markets with Network Effects," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 243-254, October.
    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. Bruno Jullien & Alessandro Pavan & Marc Rysman, 2021. "Two-sided markets, pricing, and network effects," Post-Print hal-03828345, HAL.
    19. 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.
    20. Wang, Wei & Lyu, Gaoyan, 2020. "Sequential product positioning on a platform in the presence of network effects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:inm:orisre:v:29:y:2018:i:2:p:498-519. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.