The DOI matches its Crossref record; 92 of the 98 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework
Open accessAbstract
An integrative framework is proposed to advance management research on technological platforms, bridging two theoretical perspectives: economics, which sees platforms as double-sided markets, and engineering design, which sees platforms as technological architectures. While the economic perspective informs our understanding of platform competition, the engineering design perspective informs our view of platform innovation. The article argues that platforms can be usefully conceptualized as evolving organizations or meta-organizations that: (1) federate and coordinate constitutive agents who can innovate and compete; (2) create value by generating and harnessing economies of scope in supply or/and in demand; and (3) entail a modular technological architecture composed of a core and a periphery. In support of this conceptualization, a classification system is presented, indicating that technological platforms appear in a variety of organizational forms: within firms, across supply chains, and across industry innovation ecosystems. As an illustration, the framework is then applied to derive a simple model highlighting patterns of interaction between platform innovation and competition, yielding hypotheses that could be tested empirically by future scholars.
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
“Because of their central role in encouraging project development, they are often thought to foster an ecosystem under the sponsorship of a platform leader which develops and provides specific functionality to smaller projects (Gawer, 2014).”
From The sustainability of open source commons (2023) · cites this paper as Gawer, 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“It also shows that content creators face a ‘winner-take-all’ situation (Cennamo and Santalo 2013, p. 1331; Gawer 2014, p. 1241).”
From Content Creators Between Platform Control and User Autonomy: The Role of Algorithms and Revenue Sharing (2023) · cites this paper as Gawer 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Even in the service innovation literature (Barrett et al. 2015;Lusch and Nambisan 2015), where value-in-use is emphasized, and in the platform and network effects literature (Gawer 2014;Parker et al. 2016), where demand and user adoption are important, there is a lack of a vocabulary and coherent framework for dealing with use recombination and how it relates to value creation and capture in digit”
From Recombination in the open-ended value landscape of digital innovation (2018) · cites this paper as Gawer 2014
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
A resource‐based view of the firm
Wernerfelt, B. (1984) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250050207 · Cited by 25,635 · cited 1×
“Given the entrality of economies of scope in theories of organizations (Teece, 980; Wernerfelt, 1984; Helfat and Eisenhardt, 2004), this comon underpinning provides the intuition that an organizational ens might be useful to develop a unifying framework for platforms. y organization I do not…”
BackgroundSocial Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness
Uzzi, B. (1997) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393808 · Cited by 9,853
(2003) · Cited by 9,368
Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology
Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393988 · Cited by 8,499
(1938) · Virtual Defense Library (Ministerio de Defensa) · Cited by 7,145
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
On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules
Parnas, D. L. (1972) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/361598.361623 · Cited by 4,838
The Architecture of Complexity
Simon, H. A. (1991) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-0718-9_31 · Cited by 4,479 · cited 2×
“…by breaking up a complex system into discrete components, which interact through standardized interfaces within a standardized architecture, one can eliminate what would otherwise be an unmanageable spaghetti tangle of systemic interconnections (Simon, 1962; Parnas, 1972; Langlois, 2002).”
BackgroundOpen Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology
Badawy, A. M. (2004) · Journal of Engineering and Technology Management · doi:10.1016/j.jengtecman.2004.05.003 · Cited by 3,637
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
6 of the 98 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Baldwin, 2000, vol. 1
- Zaheer, 2000, Strategic networks, Strategic Management Journal, 21, 203, 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200003)21:3<203::AID-SMJ102>3.0.CO;2-K · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Towards a theory of ecosystems
Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2904 · Cited by 3,724
“…also considers how technological interfaces (and which parts of the technology are “open” or “closed”) or governance (such as membership and participation rules) shape collective outcomes (Ceccagnoli et al ., 2012; Cennamo, 2016; Gawer & Cusumano, 2002; Gawer, 2014; Wareham et al ., 2014).”
InfluentialSelf-citationTeece, D. J. (2018) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2017.01.015 · Cited by 1,823
The Digital Platform: A Research Agenda
de Reuver, M., Sørensen, C., & Basole, R. C. (2018) · Journal of Information Technology · doi:10.1057/s41265-016-0033-3 · Cited by 1,681
“Some scholars use ecosystems to denote the organisational form associated with an industry platform (Gawer, 2014) or as an unspecific notion of a collection of assets (Thomas et al., 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialThe Platformization of the Web: Making Web Data Platform Ready
Helmond, A. (2015) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/2056305115603080 · Cited by 1,100
“…Gawer argues, platforms have often been theorized from two distinct perspectives: “economic theory conceptualizes platforms as markets (Rochet & Tirole, 2003),” whereas “engi-neering design theorizes them as ‘modular technological architectures’ (Baldwin & Woodard, 2009)” (Gawer, 2014, p. 1240).”
BackgroundInnovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition
Granstrand, O., & Holgersson, M. (2019) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2019.102098 · Cited by 1,360
The platformization of cultural production: Theorizing the contingent cultural commodity
Nieborg, D. B., & Poell, T. (2018) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444818769694 · Cited by 1,530
“Particularly problematic is that business scholars tend to treat platforms as relatively static objects (Gawer, 2014; Tiwana, 2014).”
Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps
McIntyre, D. P., & Srinivasan, A. (2017) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2596 · Cited by 1,109
Helfat, C. E., & Raubitschek, R. S. (2018) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.01.019 · Cited by 1,060
Bogers, M. L. A. M., Zobel, A., Afuah, A. N., Almirall, E., Brunswicker, S., Dahlander, L., Frederiksen, L., Gawer, A., Gruber, M. B., Haefliger, S., et al. (2016) · Industry and Innovation · doi:10.1080/13662716.2016.1240068 · Cited by 1,091
“…challenge is to innovate together and preserve the collective welfare as defined by the overall vibrancy or performance of the ecosystem, while at the same time preserving or enhancing the individual performance of ecosystem members in competitive markets (Lopez-Berzosa and Gawer 2014).”
Cenamor, J., Parida, V., & Wincent, J. (2019) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.03.035 · Cited by 1,163
“However, major emphasis is on using an industrial level of analysis, with less attention on the implications for internal organization (Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundMethodIntroduction—Platforms and Infrastructures in the Digital Age
Constantinides, P., Henfridsson, O., & Parker, G. G. (2018) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2018.0794 · Cited by 943
“Just as platforms facilitate the connection between supply and demand (Baldwin and Clark 2000, Gawer 2014), digital infrastructures provide the necessary computing and networking resources.”
BackgroundHein, A., Schreieck, M., Riasanow, T., Setzke, D. S., Wiesche, M., Böhm, M., & Krcmar, H. (2020) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-019-00377-4 · Cited by 945
“The degree of openness also influences competition within and across ecosystems (Gawer 2014; Thomas et al. 2014).”
BackgroundEmbracing Digital Innovation in Incumbent Firms: How Volvo Cars Managed Competing Concerns1
Svahn, F., Mathiassen, L., & Lindgren, R. (2017) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2017/41.1.12 · Cited by 903
“2010), APIs and software patterns (Alexander 1999), and the network effects of digital platforms (Gawer 2014).”
BackgroundMobility as a Service: A Critical Review of Definitions, Assessments of Schemes, and Key Challenges
Jittrapirom, P., Caiati, V., Feneri, A.-M., Ebrahimigharehbaghi, S., González, M. J. A., & Narayan, J. (2017) · Urban Planning · doi:10.17645/up.v2i2.931 · Cited by 963
“Technically, integration of services may be realised by using so-called platform technology, which facilitates interactions between trav-ellers and suppliers of transport services in an improved or smarter way (Ballon, 2009; Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialUnpacking the innovation ecosystem construct: Evolution, gaps and trends
Gomes, L. A. D. V., Facin, A. L. F., Salerno, M. S., & Ikenami, R. K. (2018) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.009 · Cited by 836
“We also identi fi ed some opportunities for further research. i) It is not clearhowa fi rmbecomes aleader of anindustryplatform(as suggested by Gawer, 2014); ii) Which the organizational processes to implement and manage an industry platform are; iii) How to integrate the supply chain platform and…”
BackgroundInfluentialWhat is co-creation? An interactional creation framework and its implications for value creation
Ramaswamy, V., & Ozcan, K. (2018) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.027 · Cited by 735
Agile Business Model Innovation in Digital Entrepreneurship: Lean Startup Approaches
Ghezzi, A., & Cavallo, A. (2018) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.06.013 · Cited by 724
“…C - a common factor for all three digital startups was that they operated a multisided platform business connecting different pools of customers (Gawer, 2014; Evans and Schmalensee, 2016) and, having selected similar business approaches, it was easier to carry our comparisons and cross-case…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialThe sharing economy and digital platforms: A review and research agenda
Sutherland, W., & Jarrahi, M. H. (2018) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.07.004 · Cited by 725
Platform ecosystems as meta‐organizations: Implications for platform strategies
Kretschmer, T., Leiponen, A. E., Schilling, M. A., & Vasudeva, G. (2020) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3250 · Cited by 713
Digital platforms’ boundaries: The interplay of firm scope, platform sides, and digital interfaces
Gawer, A. (2021) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2020.102045 · Cited by 626
Self-citationUnderstanding platform business models: A mixed methods study of marketplaces
Taeuscher, K., & Laudien, S. M. (2017) · European Management Journal · doi:10.1016/j.emj.2017.06.005 · Cited by 614
“Marketplaces, a rapidly emerging category of platforms (Gawer, 2014; McIntyre & Srinivasan, 2016), enable and support transactions between independent supply-and demand-side participants.”
BackgroundA review of the ecosystem concept — Towards coherent ecosystem design
Tsujimoto, M., Kajikawa, Y., Tomita, J., & Matsumoto, Y. (2017) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.06.032 · Cited by 580
“On the other hand, many researchers set ecosystem design as a research topic in their papers (Gawer, 2014; Gawer and Cusumano, 2014; Hienerth et al., 2014; Khavul and Bruton, 2013; Wareham et al., 2014; Wei et al., 2014).”
Global platforms and ecosystems: Implications for international business theories
Nambisan, S., Zahra, S. A., & Luo, Y. (2019) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-019-00262-4 · Cited by 587
“Platforms constitute a shared set of technologies, components, services, architecture, and relationships that serve as a common foundation for diverse sets of actors to converge and create value (Gawer & Cusumano, 2002; Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundAdopting a platform approach in servitization: Leveraging the value of digitalization
Cenamor, J., Sjödin, D., & Parida, V. (2017) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.12.033 · Cited by 577
Maneuvering in Poor Visibility: How Firms Play the Ecosystem Game when Uncertainty is High
Dattée, B., Alexy, O., & Autio, E. (2018) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2015.0869 · Cited by 567
“…offerings into a coherent, customer-facing solution” (Adner, 2006: 98), at the core of an innovation ecosystem one often finds a technology platform: a set of shared assets, standards, and interfaces that underpins an activity system surrounding it (Gawer, 2014; Thomas, Autio, & Gann, 2014).”
BackgroundThe Role of Artificial Intelligence and Data Network Effects for Creating User Value
Gregory, R. W., Henfridsson, O., Kaganer, E., & Kyriakou, H. (2021) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2019.0178 · Cited by 540
Circular ecosystem innovation: An initial set of principles
Konietzko, J., Bocken, N. M. P., & Hultink, E. J. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119942 · Cited by 634
On open innovation, platforms, and entrepreneurship
Nambisan, S., Siegel, D. S., & Kenney, M. F. (2018) · Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal · doi:10.1002/sej.1300 · Cited by 531
“However, the essential concepts underlying their application have remained the same—modular architectures have standardized interfaces that: (a) enable the reuse of shared components or assets that, in turn, leads to economies of scale and scope in innovation (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg, 1995; Gawer, 2014); and (b) allow…”
BackgroundInfluentialAlgorithmic Management of Work on Online Labor Platforms: When Matching Meets Control
Möhlmann, M., Zalmanson, L., Henfridsson, O., & Gregory, R. W. (2021) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2021/15333 · Cited by 554
Platform Competition: A Systematic and Interdisciplinary Review of the Literature
Rietveld, J., & Schilling, M. A. (2020) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206320969791 · Cited by 577
“First, following the notion that successfully managing a platform ecosystem is an inherently dynamic process (Gawer, 2014), future research will benefit from studying evolving governance strategies over time and as a function of other factors.”
Digital platforms for development: Foundations and research agenda
Bonina, C., Koskinen, K., Eaton, B., & Gawer, A. (2021) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/isj.12326 · Cited by 512
“…the generation of network effects can be the source of tremendous benefit to users and profit for platform owners, they can eventually lead to winner-take-all scenarios, where industries are dominated by a few platform players (Gawer, 2014), potentially leading to detrimental impacts on users.”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationRoles during innovation ecosystem genesis: A literature review
Dedehayir, O., Mäkinen, S., & Ortt, R. (2016) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.028 · Cited by 501
“Notwithstanding, there have been recent calls to enhance our understanding of how innovation ecosystems come into existence in the first place (Gawer, 2014; Autio and Thomas, 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialPlatform-Dependent Entrepreneurs: Power Asymmetries, Risks, and Strategies in the Platform Economy
Cutolo, D., & Kenney, M. (2021) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2019.0103 · Cited by 507
A Typology of Crowdwork Platforms
Howcroft, D., & Bergvall‐Kåreborn, B. (2018) · Work Employment and Society · doi:10.1177/0950017018760136 · Cited by 502
Integrating Research on Interorganizational Networks and Ecosystems
Shipilov, A. V., & Gawer, A. (2019) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2018.0121 · Cited by 513
Jovanovic, M., Sjödin, D., & Parida, V. (2021) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102218 · Cited by 560
“In the initial phase of industrial digital platform development, manufacturers often develop product platforms around key installed bases (Gawer, 2014; Sandebrg et al., 2020; Svahn et al., 2017).”
BackgroundLokuge, S., Sedera, D., Grover, V., & Xu, D. (2018) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2018.09.001 · Cited by 540
Competing in Digital Markets: A Platform-Based Perspective
Cennamo, C. (2021) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2016.0048 · Cited by 487
Digital platforms and ecosystems: remarks on the dominant organizational forms of the digital age
Gawer, A. (2021) · The Innovation · doi:10.1080/14479338.2021.1965888 · Cited by 378
“…of platforms, ecosystems, and digital innovation, these themes were not mainstream in management research (see, for example, Cusumano et al., 2019, 2021; Gawer, 2009, 2014; Gawer & Cusumano, 2002, 2014; Gawer & Srnicek, 2021; Jacobides et al., 2018; McIntyre et al., 2020; Shipilov & Gawer, 2020).”
BackgroundInnovation, entrepreneurial, knowledge, and business ecosystems: Old wine in new bottles?
Scaringella, L., & Radziwon, A. (2017) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.023 · Cited by 404
Recombination in the open-ended value landscape of digital innovation
Henfridsson, O., Nandhakumar, J., Scarbrough, H., & Panourgias, N. (2018) · Information and Organization · doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2018.03.001 · Cited by 390
“As path channeling is successfully achieved, the chances that a firm's digital resource turns into a platform, that is, an "evolving organizations or meta-organizations composed of agents who can innovate and compete" (Gawer 2014, p. 1240), increases.”
InfluentialThe platform economy: restructuring the space of capitalist accumulation
Kenney, M. F., & Zysman, J. (2020) · Cambridge Journal of Regions Economy and Society · doi:10.1093/cjres/rsaa001 · Cited by 391
“According to Annabelle Gawer (2014, 1239), ‘platforms are evolving organisations or meta-organisations that (1) federate and coordinate constitutive agents who can innovate and compete; (2) create value by generating and harnessing economies of scope in supply or/and in demand side of the markets; and (3) entail a mod…”
BackgroundPlatform Strategy: Managing Ecosystem Value Through Selective Promotion of Complements
Rietveld, J., Schilling, M. A., & Bellavitis, C. (2017) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2019.1290 · Cited by 336
“…interplay in how each element of the bundle contributes to the overall value of the system, and there are important interdependencies between the actions of the members comprising the ecosystem (Pierce 2009, Ceccagnoli et al. 2012, Gawer 2014, McIntyre and Srinivasan 2017, Jacobides et al. 2018).”
Hermes, S., Riasanow, T., Clemons, E. K., Böhm, M., & Krcmar, H. (2020) · BuR - Business Research · doi:10.1007/s40685-020-00125-x · Cited by 390
Circularity Brokers: Digital Platform Organizations and Waste Recovery in Food Supply Chains
Ciulli, F., Kolk, A., & Boe-Lillegraven, S. (2020) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-019-04160-5 · Cited by 310
“Different types of platforms have been described in the literature (Gawer 2014; Thomas et al.”
BackgroundThe “sharing” economy: labor, inequality, and social connection on for‐profit platforms
Schor, J. B., & Attwood‐Charles, W. (2017) · Sociology Compass · doi:10.1111/soc4.12493 · Cited by 379
“Economists take a different approach and emphasize that these are multisided markets—that is, the platform faces both workers and consumers (Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundAhmed, A. R., Bhatti, S. H., Gölgeci̇, İ., & Arslan, A. (2022) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121513 · Cited by 342
“However, prior research has primarily focused on the role of external factors in strengthening DPC, particularly at the industrial level (e.g., Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundDecentralized Governance of Digital Platforms
Chen, Y., Richter, J. I., & Patel, P. C. (2020) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206320916755 · Cited by 335
“Digital platforms are digital systems that facilitate communications, interactions, and innovations to support economic transactions and social activities (Cennamo, 2019; Constantinides, Henfridsson, & Parker, 2018; Gawer, 2014; McIntyre & Srinivasan, 2017; Thomas, Autio, & Gann, 2014).”
BackgroundCiriello, R., Richter, A., & Schwabe, G. (2018) · Business & Information Systems Engineering · doi:10.1007/s12599-018-0559-8 · Cited by 345
“A digital technology platform is ‘‘a building block, providing an essential function to a technological system – which acts as a foundation upon which other firms can develop complementary products, technologies or services’’ (Gawer 2014, p. 2).”
BackgroundEcosystem-specific advantages in international digital commerce
Li, J., Chen, L., Yi, J., Mao, J., & Liao, J. (2019) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-019-00263-3 · Cited by 300
“…considerable management research and much of it suggests that understanding platforms and their ecosystems requires new theoretical insights (e.g., Gawer, 2014; Gawer & Cusumano, 2014; McIntyre & Srinivasan, 2017; Nambisan, Lyytinen, Majchrzak, & Song, 2017; Teece, 2018; Yoo, Boland, Lyytinen, &…”
BackgroundPlatform Architecture and Quality Trade-offs of Multihoming Complements
Cennamo, C., Ozalp, H., & Kretschmer, T. (2018) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2018.0779 · Cited by 273
“2 A platform’s technological architecture shapes its core functionalities (Baldwin and Woodard 2009, Gawer 2014), which can affect both competitive performance (Gawer and Cusumano 2002, Zhu and Iansiti 2012) and incentives of independent firms to develop complements (Anderson et al. 2014, Tiwana et…”
BackgroundInfluentialEngagement platforms in the sharing economy
Breidbach, C. F., & Brodie, R. J. (2017) · Journal of Service Theory and Practice · doi:10.1108/jstp-04-2016-0071 · Cited by 270
Liminal movement by digital platform‐based sharing economy ventures: The case of Uber Technologies
Garud, R., Kumaraswamy, A., Roberts, A., & Xu, L. (2022) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3148 · Cited by 274
Designing a multi-sided data platform: findings from the International Data Spaces case
Otto, B., & Jarke, M. (2019) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-019-00362-x · Cited by 270
“This is somewhat surprising, as Gawer (2014) and de Reuver et al. (2018), for example, consider the na-scence (or “ genesis ” ) of MSPs a very promising and worth-while area of research.”
BackgroundInfluentialDynamic Capabilities and (Digital) Platform Lifecycles
Teece, D. J. (2017) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/s0742-332220170000037008 · Cited by 260
“All these uses remain relevant (Gawer, 2014).”
Cozzolino, A., Corbo, L., & Aversa, P. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.058 · Cited by 295
“…argument of the platform ecosystems literature is that technological evolution in interdependency situations stimulates competition and cooperation (Gawer, 2014; Hannah & Eisenhardt, 2018), and that platform owners need to balance their business and technological decisions not to discourage…”
Complexity and Information Systems Research in the Emerging Digital World
Benbya, H., Nan, N., Tanriverdi̇, H., & Yoo, Y. (2020) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2020/13304 · Cited by 296
“Some firms transition from a portfolio of digitized products to a product platform over which they develop an offer of a family of derivative digital products (Gawer 2014).”
How open is innovation? A retrospective and ideas forward
Dahlander, L., Gann, D., & Wallin, M. W. (2021) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2021.104218 · Cited by 284
“Platforms are distinct from traditional companies in the way they mediate transactions across particpants and how they create network effects (Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundThe Platform Political Economy of FinTech: Reintermediation, Consolidation and Capitalisation
Langley, P., & Leyshon, A. (2020) · New Political Economy · doi:10.1080/13563467.2020.1766432 · Cited by 251
“A core feature of the platform business model is the intermediation of multi-and two-sided markets (Gawer 2014).”
BackgroundThe future of manufacturing: A Delphi-based scenario analysis on Industry 4.0
Culot, G., Orzes, G., Sartor, M., & Nassimbeni, G. (2020) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120092 · Cited by 250
“The current debate on Industry 4.0 in manufacturing has only partially been influenced by the “economic perspective” of platform research so far (Gawer, 2014; McIntyre and Srinivisan, 2017), the main focus being on manufacturers sponsoring technological platforms to engage with third-party…”
BackgroundInfluentialThe evolution of platform business models: Exploring competitive battles in the world of platforms
Zhao, Y., von Delft, S., Morgan‐Thomas, A., & Buck, T. (2019) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2019.101892 · Cited by 260
“This is also what differentiates multi-sided platforms from manufacturing or product platforms that firms may use to optimize manufacturing of a product or a family of related products in concert with a network of suppliers (Gawer, 2014; Krishnan and Gupta, 2001).”
BackgroundInnovating with enterprise systems and digital platforms: A contingent resource-based theory view
Sedera, D., Lokuge, S., Grover, V., Sarker, S., & Sarker, S. (2016) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2016.01.001 · Cited by 246
“This in turn increases the probability of achieving innovation through the digital platforms [64,65].”
BackgroundDoes Platform Owner’s Entry Crowd Out Innovation? Evidence from Google Photos
Foerderer, J., Kude, T., Mithas, S., & Heinzl, A. (2018) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2018.0787 · Cited by 236
Sandberg, J., Holmström, J., & Lyytinen, K. (2020) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2020/14520 · Cited by 236
Holgersson, M., Granstrand, O., & Bogers, M. L. A. M. (2017) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2017.08.007 · Cited by 251
“…and open innovation, it is also relevant for future research and management of coopetition (e.g., Brandenburger and Nalebuff, 1996; Gnyawali and Park, 2011; Fernandez et al., 2014; Bouncken et al., 2015) and platforms (e.g., Gawer, 2014; Gawer and Cusumano, 2014; Bogers et al., 2017), respectively.”
BackgroundAn Ecosystem-Level Process Model of Business Model Disruption: The Disruptor's Gambit
Snihur, Y., Thomas, L. D. W., & Burgelman, R. A. (2018) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12343 · Cited by 232
Disruption in Platform‐Based Ecosystems
Ozalp, H., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12351 · Cited by 223
Self-citationDigitalization in retailing: multi-sided platforms as drivers of industry transformation
Hänninen, M., Smedlund, A., & Mitronen, L. (2017) · Baltic Journal of Management · doi:10.1108/bjm-04-2017-0109 · Cited by 235
“…inter-or intradependent networks where participants co-create value (Adner & Kapoor 2009; Autio & Thomas 2014; Kijima 2015; Smedlund & Faghankhani 2015) and to which participants attach complementary products, services or technologies (Jacobides et al. 2006; Gawer & Cusumano 2014; Gawer 2014).”
BackgroundJacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2024) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2023.104906 · Cited by 220
“…knowledge spillovers between the interdependent modular components of a technological system and their providers (Boudreau, 2010; Gawer and Cusumano, 2002, 2014; Gawer, 2014); adoption of components across the system (Ozcan and Santos, 2015); and integration of system components (Boudreau, 2017).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationVeile, J., Schmidt, M.-C., & Voigt, K. (2022) · Journal of business research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.062 · Cited by 187
Nieborg, D. B., & Helmond, A. (2018) · Media Culture & Society · doi:10.1177/0163443718818384 · Cited by 222
“…and platforms studies and information systems research are particularly sensitive to the medium-specificity of platforms as programmable and extensible technical systems that enact institutional relationships through software (Bogost and Montfort, 2009; Gawer, 2014; McIntyre and Srinivasan, 2017).”
BackgroundMutualism and the dynamics of new platform creation: A study of Cisco and fog computing
Khanagha, S., Ansari, S. S., Paroutis, S., & Oviedo, L. (2020) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3147 · Cited by 229
“…and Gann, 2014; Van Alstyne, Parker and Choudary, 2016) and have left many incumbents either disadvantaged (Eisenmann, Parker and Van Alstyne, 2011; Gawer, 2014), disrupted (e.g., Kumaraswamy, Garud & Ansari, 2018), or struggling to grow at the rates that markets expect (Benner and Ranganathan,…”
BackgroundMultisided Platforms as New Organizational Forms
McIntyre, D., Srinivasan, A., Afuah, A. N., Gawer, A., & Kretschmer, T. (2020) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2018.0018 · Cited by 233
Organization of knowledge ecosystems: Prefigurative and partial forms
Järvi, K., Almpanopoulou, A., & Ritala, P. (2018) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.05.007 · Cited by 199
“This approach is informed by recent suggestions (e.g., Gawer, 2014) that an organizational perspective can further our understanding of knowledge creation in knowledge ecosystems.”
Open innovation, information, and entrepreneurship within platform ecosystems
Eckhardt, J., Ciuchta, M. P., & Carpenter, M. A. (2018) · Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal · doi:10.1002/sej.1298 · Cited by 199
Digital platform openness: Drivers, dimensions and outcomes
Broekhuizen, T., Emrich, O., Gijsenberg, M. J., Broekhuis, M., Donkers, B., & Sloot, L. M. (2019) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.001 · Cited by 228
“…platforms' functionality via increased network effects and innovation potential (Binken & Stremersch, 2009; Claussen, Essling, & Kretschmer, 2015; Gawer, 2014), one of the key challenges of this increased openness is the need to maintain control over all parties involved (Boudreau, 2010;…”
BackgroundFlew, T., Martin, F. R., & Suzor, N. P. (2019) · Journal of Digital Media & Policy · doi:10.1386/jdmp.10.1.33_1 · Cited by 193
“Annabelle Gawer (2014) envisaged platforms as evolving technological organizations that create multi-sided markets, federating and coordinating Internet actors in innovation and competition, and creating value by harnessing economies of scope in supply or/and in demand.”
BackgroundConfigurations of platform organizations: Implications for complementor engagement
Saadatmand, F., Lindgren, R., & Schultze, U. (2019) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2019.03.015 · Cited by 190
“Digital platforms 1 as an emergent organizational form (Gawer, 2014; Nambisan et al., 2017) are characterized by (1) technology: a technological architecture constituted of a modular core, standardized interfaces, and complementary extensions (e.g., Baldwin and Woodard, 2009; Karhu et al., 2018),…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialWhat is digital transformation? Core tensions facing established companies on the global stage
Furr, N., Özcan, P., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2022) · Global Strategy Journal · doi:10.1002/gsj.1442 · Cited by 215
“Ecosystems may (or may not) overlap with platforms (Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundPlatform-based servitization and business model adaptation by established manufacturers
Tian, J., Coreynen, W., Matthyssens, P., & Lei, S. (2021) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102222 · Cited by 188
Offerings as Digitalized Interactive Platforms: A Conceptual Framework and Implications
Ramaswamy, V., & Ozcan, K. (2018) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jm.15.0365 · Cited by 205
“…enhanced through interactions in offerings as DIPs that were not mere intermediaries between different types of customers, as in demand-side economic markets, for instance (Rochet and Tirole 2006), or modularizations of products, as in supply-side product development, for instance (Gawer 2014).”
BackgroundDigital Platforms for the Circular Economy: Exploring Meta-Organizational Orchestration Mechanisms
Blackburn, O., Ritala, P., & Keränen, J. (2022) · Organization & Environment · doi:10.1177/10860266221130717 · Cited by 182
“Digital platforms have traditionally been conceptualized in economic and technological terms as two- or multi-sided markets built on a technological architecture that intermediates transactions among platform actors (Gawer, 2014; Sun & Tse, 2009; Tura et al., 2018).”
BackgroundThe path to outcome delivery: Interplay of service market strategy and open business models
Visnjic, I., Neely, A. D., & Jovanovic, M. (2018) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2018.02.003 · Cited by 181
“For instance, some fi rms choose to establish a dynamic control over di ff erent stakeholders, while relying on them to provide products and services to each other (Dattée et al., 2017; Gawer, 2014; Gawer and Cusumano, 2002).”
BackgroundThe Translucent Hand of Managed Ecosystems: Engaging Communities for Value Creation and Capture
Altman, E. J., Nagle, F., & Tushman, M. L. (2021) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2020.0244 · Cited by 200
Klievink, B., Bharosa, N., & Tan, Y. (2015) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2015.12.002 · Cited by 177
“From an organizational perspective, studies on platforms often address questions like how to become a platform leader (Gawer, 2009), how to make money on offering something via a platform (Eaton, 2012), or on the role and level of control that developers have (Tiwana et al., 2010).”
BackgroundBereznoy, A. V., Meissner, D., & Scuotto, V. (2021) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/jkm-10-2020-0769 · Cited by 182
The Platform Economy Matures: Pervasive Power, Private Regulation, and Dependent Entrepreneurs
Kenney, M. F., Bearson, D., & Zysman, J. (2019) · Socio-Economic Review · doi:10.1093/ser/mwab014 · Cited by 207
“When we say ‘platform’, we are referring to a digital exchange platform firm, defined as online places or infrastructures (i.e. websites and mobile apps) designed spe-cifically to facilitate transactions and other valued exchanges of goods, information and opinion (Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundFacebook’s evolution: development of a platform-as-infrastructure
Helmond, A., Nieborg, D. B., & van der Vlist, F. N. (2019) · Internet Histories · doi:10.1080/24701475.2019.1593667 · Cited by 224
“Additionally, Facebook made a number of high-profile acquisitions, including Instagram (already in 2012), WhatsApp (2014), Oculus VR (2014), and LiveRail (2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialFrom proprietary to collective governance: How do platform participation strategies evolve?
O'Mahony, S. C., & Karp, R. (2020) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3150 · Cited by 190
Ecosystem-as-structure and ecosystem-as-coevolution: A constructive examination
Hong, H., & Shi, Y. (2020) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102193 · Cited by 186
How digital platform capability affects the innovation performance of SMEs—Evidence from China
Jiang, H., Yang, J., & Gai, J. (2022) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102187 · Cited by 163
Can the power of platforms be harnessed for governance?
Ansell, C., & Miura, S. (2019) · Public Administration · doi:10.1111/padm.12636 · Cited by 188
Building the Value of Next-Generation Platforms: The Paradox of Diminishing Returns
Cennamo, C. (2018) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206316658350 · Cited by 173
“A technological platform is a stable set of technological components that are shared and reused by developers of diverse complements (Baldwin & Woodard, 2009; Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialDigital entrepreneurial ecosystems: A systematic literature review
Bejjani, M., Göcke, L., & Menter, M. (2023) · Technological forecasting & social change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122372 · Cited by 138
Rolland, K. H., Mathiassen, L., & Rai, A. (2018) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2018.0788 · Cited by 173
“Gawer (2014) further argued that agents can be both individuals and firms, hence diverging from the typical economic perspective on digital platforms, which focuses on consumers.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialA Paradigmatic Analysis of Digital Application Marketplaces
Ghazawneh, A., & Henfridsson, O. (2015) · Journal of Information Technology · doi:10.1057/jit.2015.16 · Cited by 156
“Our decision of going for a two-dimensional typology with control and functionality scope as main dimensions re fl ects an engineering design view of platforms (Gawer, 2014), as well as the need to strike a balance between simplicity and granularity.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialFostering digital platform innovation: From two to multi‐sided platforms
Trabucchi, D., & Buganza, T. (2019) · Creativity and Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/caim.12320 · Cited by 158
Sharing Economy, Sharing Responsibility? Corporate Social Responsibility in the Digital Age
Etter, M. A., Fieseler, C., & Whelan, G. (2019) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-019-04212-w · Cited by 167
“…and controlling developments in ICTs – e.g., mobile apps that enable quick and automated identification and matching of these exchange partners (Gawer, 2014) – platform managers and owners become hierarchically central to sharing activities and can potentially generate significant levels of…”
BackgroundRietveld, J., Ploog, J. N., & Nieborg, D. B. (2020) · Academy of Management Discoveries · doi:10.5465/amd.2019.0064 · Cited by 151
“weight to the claim that successfully managing a platform ecosystem is an inherently dynamic process (Gawer, 2014; Tiwana et al., 2010).”
Can self-regulation save digital platforms?
Cusumano, M. A., Gawer, A., & Yoffie, D. B. (2021) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/dtab052 · Cited by 145
Metadata
- Authors
- Gawer, A.
- Affiliations
- Imperial College London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Gawer, Annabelle
- ORCID
- Gawer, Annabelle
- Venue
- Research Policy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-09
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1239-1249
- ISSN
- 0048-7333 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2052419127
- Cited by
- 1,869
- References
- 98
- Citations by year
- 2026: 184 · 2025: 181 · 2024: 193 · 2023: 213 · 2022: 223 · 2021: 274 · 2020: 197 · 2019: 137 · 2018: 115 · 2017: 80 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 4
- FWCI
- 153.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Research Policy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- EPSRC NEMODE Network+
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Digital Platforms and Economics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Product Development and Customization
- Keywords
- technology platforms, technical architecture, platform competition, platform innovation, meta-organizations, economies of scope, modular architecture, core-periphery, platform classification, supply chain platforms, innovation ecosystems, integrative framework
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