IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control

  • Kevin Boudreau

    ()

    (Department of Strategy and International Management, London Business School, London NW1 4SA, United Kingdom)

Registered author(s):

    This paper studies two fundamentally distinct approaches to opening a technology platform and their different impacts on innovation. One approach is to grant access to a platform and thereby open up markets for complementary components around the platform. Another approach is to give up control over the platform itself. Using data on 21 handheld computing systems (1990-2004), I find that granting greater levels of access to independent hardware developer firms produces up to a fivefold acceleration in the rate of new handheld device development, depending on the precise degree of access and how this policy was implemented. Where operating system platform owners went further to give up control (beyond just granting access to their platforms) the incremental effect on new device development was still positive but an order of magnitude smaller. The evidence from the industry and theoretical arguments both suggest that distinct economic mechanisms were set in motion by these two approaches to opening.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1100.1215
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by INFORMS in its journal Management Science.

    Volume (Year): 56 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 10 (October)
    Pages: 1849-1872

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:56:y:2010:i:10:p:1849-1872
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA

    Phone: +1-443-757-3500
    Fax: 443-757-3515
    Web page: http://www.informs.org/
    Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Farrell, Joseph & Katz, Michael L, 2000. "Innovation, Rent Extraction, and Integration in Systems Markets," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 413-32, December.
    2. Carliss Y. Baldwin & C. Jason Woodard, 2009. "The Architecture of Platforms: A Unified View," Chapters, in: Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 2 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Perrons, Robert K., 2009. "The open kimono: How Intel balances trust and power to maintain platform leadership," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1300-1312, October.
    4. Catherine Tucker & Juanjuan Zhang, 2010. "Growing Two-Sided Networks by Advertising the User Base: A Field Experiment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 805-814, 09-10.
    5. Nocke, Volker & Peitz, Martin & Stahl, Konrad, 2004. "Platform Ownership," CEPR Discussion Papers 4657, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Langlois, Richard N., 1992. "External Economies and Economic Progress: The Case of the Microcomputer Industry," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(01), pages 1-50, March.
    7. Jeffrey A. Roberts & Il-Horn Hann & Sandra A. Slaughter, 2006. "Understanding the Motivations, Participation, and Performance of Open Source Software Developers: A Longitudinal Study of the Apache Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 984-999, July.
    8. Peng Huang & Marco Ceccagnoli & Chris Forman & D.J. Wu, 2009. "Participation in a Platform Ecosystem: Appropriability, Competition, and Access to the Installed Base," Working Papers 09-14, NET Institute, revised Sep 2009.
    9. Marc Rysman, 2009. "The Economics of Two-Sided Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(3), pages 125-43, Summer.
    10. Clayton M. Christensen & Matt Verlinden & George Westerman, 2002. "Disruption, disintegration and the dissipation of differentiability," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(5), pages 955-993, November.
    11. Thomas A. Marschak, 1962. "Strategy and Organization in a System Development Project," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 509-548 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Ashish Arora & Farasat A. S. Bokhari, 2007. "OPEN VERSUS CLOSED FIRMS AND THE DYNAMICS OF INDUSTRY EVOLUTION -super-," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 499-527, 09.
    13. Kevin M. Murphy & Steven J. Davis, 2000. "A Competitive Perspective on Internet Explorer," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 184-187, May.
    14. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2004. "Two-sided competition of proprietary vs. open source technology platforms and the implications for the software industry," Working Papers 04-30, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    15. Shane Greenstein, 2009. "Open Platform Development and the Commercial Internet," Chapters, in: Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 9 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Kevin J. Boudreau & Andrei Hagiu, 2009. "Platform Rules: Multi-Sided Platforms as Regulators," Chapters, in: Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 7 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Farrell, Joseph & Gallini, Nancy T., 1987. "Second-sourcing as a Commitment: Monopoly Incentives to Attract Competition," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt4zr9b9dr, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    18. Harikesh Nair & Pradeep Chintagunta & Jean-Pierre Dubé, 2004. "Empirical Analysis of Indirect Network Effects in the Market for Personal Digital Assistants," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 23-58, 03.
    19. Sharon Novak & Steven D. Eppinger, 2001. "Sourcing By Design: Product Complexity and the Supply Chain," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 189-204, January.
    20. Lerner, Josh & Tirole, Jean, 2002. "Some Simple Economics of Open," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 197-234, June.
    21. Wooldridge, J.M., 1990. "Distribution-Free Estimation Of Some Nonlinear Panel Data Models," Working papers 564, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
    22. Rey, Patrick & Salant, David, 2012. "Abuse of dominance and licensing of intellectual property," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 518-527.
    23. Teece, David J., 1986. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 285-305, December.
    24. Teece, David J., 1996. "Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 193-224, November.
    25. Joseph Farrell & Philip J. Weiser, 2003. "Modularity, Vertical Integration, and Open Access Policies: Towards A Convergence of Antitrust and Regulation In The Internet Age," Industrial Organization 0303007, EconWPA.
    26. Stanley M. Besen & Joseph Farrell, 1994. "Choosing How to Compete: Strategies and Tactics in Standardization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 117-131, Spring.
    27. David S. Evans & Andrei Hagiu & Richard Schmalensee, 2004. "A Survey Of The Economic Role Of Software Platforms In Computer - Based Industries," Discussion papers 04032, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    28. 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.
    29. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Shane Greenstein, 1997. "Technological Competition and the Structure of the Computer Industry," Working Papers 97028, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
    30. Economides, Nicholas, 1996. "Network externalities, complementarities, and invitations to enter," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 211-233, September.
    31. 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, 03.
    32. Carmen Matutes & Pierre Regibeau, 1988. ""Mix and Match": Product Compatibility without Network Externalities," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 221-234, Summer.
    33. Jeffrey T. Macher, 2006. "Technological Development and the Boundaries of the Firm: A Knowledge-Based Examination in Semiconductor Manufacturing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(6), pages 826-843, June.
    34. 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 822-41, August.
    35. 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.
    36. Antoine Martin & Michael Orlando, 2007. "Barriers to network-specific investment," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 10(4), pages 705-728, October.
    37. Joseph Farrell & Hunter K. Monroe & Garth Saloner, 1998. "The Vertical Organization of Industry: Systems Competition versus Component Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(2), pages 143-182, 06.
    38. Becchetti, Leonardo & Paganetto, Luigi, 2001. "The determinants of suboptimal technological development in the system company-component producers relationship," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(9), pages 1407-1421, November.
    39. von Krogh, Georg & Spaeth, Sebastian & Lakhani, Karim R., 2003. "Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1217-1241, July.
    40. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Pankaj Ghemawat, 2006. "Dynamic Mixed Duopoly: A Model Motivated by Linux vs. Windows," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1072-1084, July.
    41. Randal Heeb, 2003. "Randal Heeb Innovation and Vertical Integration in Complementary Markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 387-417, 09.
    42. Andras Niedermayer, 2007. "On Platforms, Incomplete Contracts, and Open Source Software," Diskussionsschriften dp0707, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    43. Michael Kende, 1998. "Profitability under an Open versus a Closed System," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(2), pages 307-326, 06.
    44. West, Joel, 2003. "How open is open enough?: Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1259-1285, July.
    45. Fixson, Sebastian K. & Park, Jin-Kyu, 2008. "The power of integrality: Linkages between product architecture, innovation, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1296-1316, September.
    46. Franke, Nikolaus & Hippel, Eric von, 2003. "Satisfying heterogeneous user needs via innovation toolkits: the case of Apache security software," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1199-1215, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:56:y:2010:i:10:p:1849-1872. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mirko Janc)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.