IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infosf/v21y2019i2d10.1007_s10796-017-9759-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effectiveness of standards consortia: Social network perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Beomjin Choi

    (California State University Sacramento)

  • T. S. Raghu

    (W. P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University)

  • Ajay Vinzé

    (University of Missouri)

  • Kevin J. Dooley

    (W. P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University)

Abstract

With the rapid assimilation of e-business capabilities into generally accepted business practices, there has been a rush to ensure standards exist to allow for seamless integration and interfaces between all the concerned parties. While standards consortia have grown in number and importance in the private sector over the past decade, little is known about how effective standards consortia are in addressing the needs for developing e-business standards. The current study examines the relationships between task characteristics of e-business standards and group effectiveness of standards consortia in terms of group centralization, group cohesiveness, and group diversity. We took a case study approach and analyze email archives from the ebXML standards efforts using social network analysis techniques. The findings of the study indicate that the expanding nature of e-business standards and a broader participation of IT vendor and users must be considered in order to improve group effectiveness of standards consortia. Managerial implications of the findings are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Beomjin Choi & T. S. Raghu & Ajay Vinzé & Kevin J. Dooley, 2019. "Effectiveness of standards consortia: Social network perspectives," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 405-416, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:21:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s10796-017-9759-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10796-017-9759-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10796-017-9759-x
    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/s10796-017-9759-x?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. Tridas Mukhopadhyay & Sunder Kekre, 2002. "Strategic and Operational Benefits of Electronic Integration in B2B Procurement Processes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(10), pages 1301-1313, October.
    2. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    3. Nurmilaakso, Juha-Miikka, 2008. "Adoption of e-business functions and migration from EDI-based to XML-based e-business frameworks in supply chain integration," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 721-733, June.
    4. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    5. Hawkins, Richard, 1999. "The rise of consortia in the information and communication technology industries: emerging implications for policy," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 159-173, March.
    6. Farrell, Joseph & Saloner, Garth, 1986. "Installed Base and Compatibility: Innovation, Product Preannouncements, and Predation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 940-955, December.
    7. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    8. Manju K. Ahuja & Kathleen M. Carley, 1999. "Network Structure in Virtual Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(6), pages 741-757, December.
    9. James Wade, 1995. "Dynamics of organizational communities and technological bandwagons: An empirical investigation of community evolution in the microprocessor market," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(S1), pages 111-133.
    10. 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.
    11. Hillol Bala & Viswanath Venkatesh, 2007. "Assimilation of Interorganizational Business Process Standards," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 340-362, September.
    12. Albert Jones & Nenad Ivezic & Michael Gruninger, 2001. "Toward Self-Integrating Software Applications for Supply Chain Management," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 403-412, December.
    13. Kim Wüllenweber & Daniel Beimborn & Tim Weitzel & Wolfgang König, 2008. "The impact of process standardization on business process outsourcing success," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 211-224, April.
    14. Paul Klemperer, 1987. "The Competitiveness of Markets with Switching Costs," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(1), pages 138-150, Spring.
    15. Karthikeyan Umapathy & Sandeep Purao, 2007. "A theoretical investigation of the emerging standards for web services," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 119-134, March.
    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. Frederik Ahlemann & Sven Dittes & Tim Fillbrunn & Kevin Rehring & Stefan Reining & Nils Urbach, 2023. "Managing In-Company IT Standardization: A Design Theory," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 1161-1178, 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. Sillanpää, Antti & Laamanen, Tomi, 2009. "Positive and negative feedback effects in competition for dominance of network business systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 871-884, June.
    2. Vialle, Pierre & Song, Junjie & Zhang, Jian, 2012. "Competing with dominant global standards in a catching-up context. The case of mobile standards in China," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 832-846.
    3. Nicholas Economides, 1997. "The Economics of Networks," Brazilian Electronic Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, vol. 1(0), December.
    4. Geerten Van de Kaa & Daniel Scholten & Jafar Rezaei & Christine Milchram, 2017. "The Battle between Battery and Fuel Cell Powered Electric Vehicles: A BWM Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, October.
    5. Michihiro, Kandori & Rob, Rafael, 1998. "Bandwagon Effects and Long Run Technology Choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 30-60, January.
    6. Liangjie Zhao & Wenqi Duan, 2014. "Simulating the Evolution of Market Shares: The Effects of Customer Learning and Local Network Externalities," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 43(1), pages 53-70, January.
    7. Papachristos, George, 2017. "Diversity in technology competition: The link between platforms and sociotechnical transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 291-306.
    8. Heli Koski & Tobias Kretschmer, 2004. "Survey on Competing in Network Industries: Firm Strategies, Market Outcomes, and Policy Implications," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-31, March.
    9. 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.
    10. Suleymanova Irina & Wey Christian, 2011. "Bertrand Competition in Markets with Network Effects and Switching Costs," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-58, September.
    11. Kornish, Laura J., 2006. "Technology choice and timing with positive network effects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 173(1), pages 268-282, August.
    12. Vanberg, Margit A., 2005. "Network Externalities and Interconnection Incentives," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-80, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    13. Deishin Lee & Haim Mendelson, 2007. "Adoption of Information Technology Under Network Effects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 395-413, December.
    14. Kenneth Arrow, 2000. "Increasing returns: historiographic issues and path dependence," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 171-180.
    15. Marechal, Kevin, 2007. "The economics of climate change and the change of climate in economics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 5181-5194, October.
    16. Nicholas Economides, "undated". "Network Economics with Application to Finance," Financial Networks _004, Economics of Networks.
    17. Carrillo-Hermosilla, Javier, 2006. "A policy approach to the environmental impacts of technological lock-in," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 717-742, July.
    18. Suarez, Fernando F., 2004. "Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 271-286, March.
    19. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    20. Cecere, Grazia & Corrocher, Nicoletta & Battaglia, Riccardo David, 2015. "Innovation and competition in the smartphone industry: Is there a dominant design?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 162-175.

    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:infosf:v:21:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s10796-017-9759-x. 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.