The DOI matches its Crossref record; 101 of the 102 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Towards a theory of ecosystems
Open accessAbstract
Research Summary: The recent surge of interest in “ecosystems” in strategy research and practice has mainly focused on what ecosystems are and how they operate. We complement this literature by considering when and why ecosystems emerge, and what makes them distinct from other governance forms. We argue that modularity enables ecosystem emergence as it allows a set of distinct yet interdependent organizations to coordinate without full hierarchical fiat. We show how ecosystems address multilateral dependences based on various types of complementarities—supermodular or unique, unidirectional or bidirectional—which determine the ecosystem's value‐add. We argue that at the core of ecosystems lie nongeneric complementarities, and the creation of sets of roles that face similar rules. We conclude with implications for mainstream strategy and suggestions for future research. Managerial Summary: We consider what makes ecosystems different from other business constellations, including markets, alliances, or hierarchically managed supply chains. Ecosystems, we posit, are interacting organizations, enabled by modularity, not hierarchically managed, bound together by the nonredeployability of their collective investment elsewhere. Ecosystems add value as they allow managers to coordinate their multilateral dependence through sets of roles that face similar rules, thus obviating the need to enter into customized contractual agreements with each partner. We explain how different types of complementarities (unique or supermodular, generic or specific, uni‐ or bi‐directional) shape ecosystems and offer a “theory of ecosystems” that can explain what they are, when they emerge, and why alignment occurs. Finally, we outline the critical factors affecting ecosystem emergence, evolution, and success—or failure.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“A significant fraction of these multihoming investments tends to be co-specialized, such that they cannot be easily redeployed or re-used on other platforms (Jacobides et al. 2018), increasing the risk of holdup and the costs of multihoming to a distant platform.”
From Smart Timing for Smart Products? Complementor Multihoming in Nascent Platform Markets (2026) · cites this paper as Jacobides et al. 2018
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Here the focal platform actor requires specific capabilities to form and orchestrate the surrounding ecosystem (Helfat & Raubitschek, 2018), enforces governance principles and fosters generativity, allowing the complementors to undertake discrete actions to contribute to the platforms' value proposition (Adner, 2017;Jacobides et al., 2018;Teece, 2018).”
From Digital platform ecosystems in flux: From proprietary digital platforms to wide-spanning ecosystems (2023) · cites this paper as Jacobides et al., 2018
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Teece, D. J. (2007) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.640 · Cited by 16,825
Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors
(1980) · Journal of Sustainable Competitive Intelligence · doi:10.24883/iberoamericanic.v2i2.38 · Cited by 16,592
The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage
Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1998.1255632 · Cited by 12,810
The Economic Institutions of Capitalism
(1986) · The Antitrust Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0003603x8603100308 · Cited by 10,978
Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness
Uzzi, B. (1997) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393808 · Cited by 9,853
Teece, D. J. (1986) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2 · Cited by 7,842
Teece, D. J. (1993) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(93)90063-n · Cited by 7,243
Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets
Rochet, J.-C., & Tirole, J. (2003) · Journal of the European Economic Association · doi:10.1162/154247603322493212 · Cited by 5,642
Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm
Hart, O., & Moore, J. (1990) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/261729 · Cited by 5,397
Design Rules: The Power of Modularity
Baldwin, C. Y., & Clark, K. B. (2000) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/2366.001.0001 · Cited by 3,504
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 102 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Brandenburger A. M., 1996, Co‐opetition: A revolutionary mindset that combines competition and cooperation in the marketplace
- Dewey J., 1999, The essential Dewey
- 10.2307/259056 · DOI
- James W., 1975, The meaning of truth
- Teece D. J., 2014, Entry in Palgrave Encyclopedia of Management
- 10.2307/20159628 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,002 of 1,002
Smart Timing for Smart Products? Complementor Multihoming in Nascent Platform Markets
Aydin Ozden, S., Suarez, F. F., Libaers, D., & Bart, Y. (2026) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.70005 · Cited by 4
Bolfek, M., & Lu, K. (2026) · Fintech and Digital Accounting Review · doi:10.1108/fdar-10-2025-0038
Metadata
- Authors
- Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A.
- Affiliations
- London Business School (GB)
- Bocconi University (IT)
- University of Surrey (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Jacobides, Michael G.
- Venue
- Strategic Management Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-06-05
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 2255-2276
- ISSN
- 0143-2095 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0266
- OpenAlex
- W2799670133
- Cited by
- 3,724
- References
- 102
- Citations by year
- 2026: 790 · 2025: 565 · 2024: 520 · 2023: 499 · 2022: 483 · 2021: 404 · 2020: 297 · 2019: 129 · 2018: 30
- FWCI
- 358.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Strategic Management Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (publishedVersion)
- London Business School Research Online (London Business School) (acceptedVersion)
- Archivio istituzionale della Ricerca - Bocconi (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
- Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- London Business School
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Digital Platforms and Economics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Business Strategy and Innovation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
- Keywords
- business ecosystems, ecosystem emergence, modularity, complementarity, inter-organizational coordination, governance forms
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review