Cited by 85Digital Platforms and EconomicsOpen Source Software InnovationsInnovation and Knowledge Management

Platform diffusion at temporary gatherings: Social coordination and ecosystem emergence

Open access
Fang, Tommy Pan, Wu, Andy, Clough, David R.·2021·Strategic Management Journal

Abstract

Research Summary: Software platforms create value by cultivating an ecosystem of complementary products and services. Existing explanations for how a prospective complementor chooses platforms to join assume the complementor has rich information about the range of available platforms. However, complementors lack this information in many ecosystems, raising the question of how complementors learn about platforms in the first place. We investigate whether attending a temporary gathering—a hackathon—impacts the platform choices of software developers. Through a large‐scale quantitative study of 1,302 developers and 167 hackathons, supported by qualitative research, we analyze the multiple channels—sponsorship, social learning, knowledge exchange, and social coordination—through which hackathons serve as a social forum for the diffusion of platform adoption among attendees. Managerial Summary: A software platform such as Windows, iOS, or Amazon Web Services relies on third‐party developers to create applications that complement the platform and make it valuable for end users. However, developers face a wide range of possible platforms, and they may have limited information about which platforms would be worthwhile to develop for. A software platform business can educate and encourage developers to adopt their platform by supporting in‐person software development competitions, known as hackathons. Developers learn about prospective platforms that advertise at the hackathon. Developers also learn whether and how to use a platform by observing and teaching one other. Hackathons are particularly useful for spreading platform technologies: developers prefer to adopt widely used platforms, and hackathons permit developers to identify and join fashionable platforms.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/smj.3230

Cites

185 of 185 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 189 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Bikhchandani, S., Hirshleifer, D., & Welch, I. (1992). A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. Journal of Political Economy, 100(5), 992-1026.
  2. Chauvin, J., Choudhury, P., & Fang, T. P. (2020). The effects of temporal distance on communication patterns in a large multinational: Evidence from daylight savings time. Presented at the Annual Conference of the Stra- tegic Management Society.
  3. Farrell, J., & Saloner, G. (1988). Coordination through committees and markets. RAND Journal of Economics, 19 (2), 235-252.
  4. Frolund, L., Murray, F., & Riedel, M. (2018). Developing successful strategic partnerships with universities. MIT Sloan Management Review, 59(2), 71-79.
  5. Greene, W. H. (2012). Econometric analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
  6. Lemley, M. A. (2006). Terms of use. Minnesota Law Review, 624, 459-483.
  7. Skahill, P. (2015). Police departments open up 'safe lots' for craigslist transactions.
  8. Ter Wal, A., Criscuolo, P., & Salter, A. (2011). Absorptive capacity at the individual level: An ambidexterity approach to external engagement. DRUID Conference Paper on Innovation, Strategy, and Structure.
  9. Zittrain, J. L. (2006). The generative internet. Harvard Law Review, 119(7), 1974-2040.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fang, T. P., Wu, A., & Clough, D. R.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
Wu, Andy
Venue
Strategic Management Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-10-06
Volume
42
Issue
2
Pages
233-272
ISSN
  • 0143-2095 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0266
OpenAlex
W3080474460
Cited by
85
References
189
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
12.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Strategic Management Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Canada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Digital Platforms and Economics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Open Source Software Innovations
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
Keywords
hackathons, software platform, platform adoption, social learning, social coordination, ecosystem emergence, third-party developers, information asymmetry, sponsorship, knowledge sharing

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