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
Items 101–200 of 999
Generative AI and its Transformative Value for Digital Platforms
Wessel, M., Adam, M., Benlian, A., Majchrzak, A., & Thies, F. (2025) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2025.2487315 · Cited by 183
“Finally, the organizational perspective frames digital platforms as meta-organizations where innovation practices emerge through both technical mechanisms and social arrangements [14, 35, 62].”
Openness in platform ecosystems: Innovation strategies for complementary products
Cenamor, J., & Frishammar, J. (2020) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2020.104148 · Cited by 159
Pauli, T., Fielt, E., & Matzner, M. (2021) · Business & Information Systems Engineering · doi:10.1007/s12599-020-00681-w · Cited by 162
“Platforms are successful due to two central roles they can perform: acting as a technological foundation and as a market intermediary (Gawer 2014; Schreieck et al. 2016).”
BackgroundManaging innovation in the era of AI
Tekić, Ž., & Füller, J. (2023) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102254 · Cited by 150
Innovation Ecosystems vs. Innovation Systems in Terms of Collaboration and Co-creation of Value
Смородинская, Н. В., Russell, M. G., Katukov, D. D., & Still, K. (2017) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.24251/hicss.2017.636 · Cited by 137
“This literature posits that platforms can network and coordinate users not just in the role of consumers but first of all in the role of suppliers and innovators, thus helping firms to achieve the economy of scope effects and facilitate innovation [51].”
BackgroundContested Spatialities of Digital Sovereignty
Glasze, G., Cattaruzza, A., Douzet, F., Dammann, F., Bertran, M.-G., Bômont, C., Braun, M., Danet, D., Desforges, A., Géry, A., et al. (2022) · Geopolitics · doi:10.1080/14650045.2022.2050070 · Cited by 137
“In the last two decades, a new category of actors has emerged: digital platforms (Constantinides, Henfridsson, and Parker 2018; Gawer 2014).”
BackgroundPelzer, P., Frenken, K., & Boon, W. (2019) · Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions · doi:10.1016/j.eist.2019.02.003 · Cited by 135
Logue, D. M., & Grimes, M. G. (2019) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3110 · Cited by 149
Wood, A. J., & Lehdonvirta, V. (2021) · Socio-Economic Review · doi:10.1093/ser/mwab016 · Cited by 134
Miric, M., Boudreau, K. J., & Jeppesen, L. B. (2019) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2019.01.012 · Cited by 136
“…on technology platforms has demonstrated that a vital determinant of the success of technology platforms is creating conditions for outside innovators to both create and capture value by joining the platform (Parker and Alstyne, 2005; Gawer and Cusumano, 2014; Gawer, 2014; Boudreau, 2010).”
Financial inclusion through digitalisation of services for well-being
Kanungo, R. P., & Gupta, S. (2021) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120721 · Cited by 129
Banks and Fintechs: How to Develop a Digital Open Banking Approach for the Bank’s Future
Omarini, A. (2018) · International Business Research · doi:10.5539/ibr.v11n9p23 · Cited by 128
Foerderer, J., Kude, T., Schuetz, S. W., & Heinzl, A. (2019) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/isj.12186 · Cited by 126
“Second, platform development is characterized by a large number of firms participating in development (Gawer, 2014; McIntyre & Srinivasan, 2017), which introduces difficulties in scaling KBR for platform owners.”
Platforms as service ecosystems: Lessons from social media
Alaimo, C., Kallinikos, J., & Valderrama, E. (2019) · Journal of Information Technology · doi:10.1177/0268396219881462 · Cited by 132
“…been studied with a focus on the managerial and economic rationalities that drive the development of market strategies and organizational capabilities, and the formation of business networks or alliances (see e.g. Adner, 2017; Gawer, 2014; Jacobides et al., 2018; Parker et al., 2016; Teece, 2018).”
Hellemans, I., Porter, A. J., & Diriker, D. (2021) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.2943 · Cited by 135
Platforms and industrial change
Kenney, M. F., Rouvinen, P., Seppälä, T., & Zysman, J. (2019) · Industry and Innovation · doi:10.1080/13662716.2019.1602514 · Cited by 123
Literature review: Understanding information systems strategy in the digital age
Teubner, R. A., & Stockhinger, J. (2020) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2020.101642 · Cited by 159
Metaverse as Future Promising Platform Business Model: Case Study on Fashion Value Chain
Periyasami, S., & Periyasamy, A. P. (2022) · Businesses · doi:10.3390/businesses2040033 · Cited by 133
“…of products and product platforms is visible to the firm [15]. monitoring, cash flow can be maintained by the books and manual ledgers [13,14]. collection, and the recollection The visibility brings the possibility of more automation in this era of a product platform. of the amount of…”
BackgroundNucciarelli, A., Li, F., Fernandes, K. J., Goumagias, N. D., Cabras, I., Devlin, S., Kudenko⋆, D., & Cowling, P. (2017) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.12.030 · Cited by 119
“In fact, as in Gawer (2014), technological platforms interpret the digitalization and modularization of design and production practices.”
BackgroundInfluentialThe structure of an innovation ecosystem: foundations for future research
Sant’Ana, T. D., Bermejo, P. H. D. S., Moreira, M. F., & SOUZA, W. V. B. D. (2020) · Management Decision · doi:10.1108/md-03-2019-0383 · Cited by 129
Schüßler, E., Attwood-Charles, W., Kirchner, S., & Schor, J. B. (2021) · Socio-Economic Review · doi:10.1093/ser/mwab038 · Cited by 129
Complementor competitive advantage: A framework for strategic decisions
Cenamor, J. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.016 · Cited by 116
“Thus, besides the attempts to build a theory of platform ecosystems (Gawer, 2014; Jaco-bides et al., 2018; Thomas et al., 2014), there is still a need for a theoretical framework for the study of complementors that may serve as a solid basis for future research developments.”
BackgroundAmazon: A story of accumulation through intellectual rentiership and predation
Rikap, C. (2020) · Competition & Change · doi:10.1177/1024529420932418 · Cited by 116
“Technological cooperation between platform leaders has been described as a process where they support each other or use each other’s platforms to further innovate (Gawer, 2014).”
The future of the web? The coordination and early‐stage growth of decentralized platforms
Hsieh, Y., & Vergne, J. (2022) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3455 · Cited by 133
“All rights reserved. without reliance on a platform owner (Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialPlatform design framework: conceptualisation and application
Tura, N., Kutvonen, A., & Ritala, P. (2017) · Technology Analysis and Strategic Management · doi:10.1080/09537325.2017.1390220 · Cited by 114
Shaikh, M., & Levina, N. (2019) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2019.03.011 · Cited by 124
“This finding is consistent with much of the writing on value creation versus value capture in open ecosystems (e.g., Eisenmann et al. 2009; Gawer 2014; Wareham et al. 2014).”
ResultMadanaguli, A. T., Parida, V., Sjödin, D., & Oghazi, P. (2023) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122606 · Cited by 136
“…to the use and adoption of multiple terms, particularly for B2B industrial platforms, including industry platforms (Gawer and Cusumano, 2014; Tee and Gawer, 2009), technology platforms (Gawer, 2014), B2B intermediaries (Johnson and Johnson, 2005), and platform ecosystems (Jovanovic et al., 2021).”
Exploring the growth challenge of mobile payment platforms: A business model perspective
Jocevski, M., Ghezzi, A., & Arvidsson, N. (2019) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2019.100908 · Cited by 127
“The m-payment provider, as the platform leader, needs to acknowledge that the ecosystem involves different actors, and be ready to co-evolve through partnerships, customer feedback, and co-creation activities, especially within a digital environment (Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundMethodThe influence of platform service innovation on value co-creation activities and the network effect
Fu, W., Wang, Q., & Zhao, X. (2017) · Journal of service management · doi:10.1108/josm-10-2015-0347 · Cited by 110
Digital transformation of business-to-business sales: what needs to be unlearned?
Mattila, M., Yrjölä, M., & Hautamäki, P. (2021) · Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management · doi:10.1080/08853134.2021.1916396 · Cited by 153
“The notion of complementors is important as these firms can enhance a platform’s value by adding their own goods and services to it (Gawer 2014; McIntyre and Srinivasan 2017).”
BackgroundTaming Platform Power: Taking Accountability into Account in the Management of Platforms
Rahman, H. A., Karunakaran, A., & Cameron, L. D. (2024) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2022.0090 · Cited by 119
Zeqiri, A., Youssef, A. B., & Maherzi, T. (2025) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su17083482 · Cited by 140
“This phenomenon aligns with the tenets of platform theory, which underscores the pivotal role of digital platforms in reconfiguring economic interactions and facilitating collaborative business models among small and medium-sized enterprises [18,19].”
Crowdwork platform governance toward organizational value creation
Gol, E. S., Stein, M., & Avital, M. (2019) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.001 · Cited by 123
“otherwise able to transact with each other (Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundSarwar, Z., Gao, J., & Khan, A. U. (2023) · Asia Pacific Journal of Management · doi:10.1007/s10490-023-09879-4 · Cited by 107
“Previous research also tends to focus on the external perspective (network value) in terms of value creation (McIntyre & Sriniva - san, 2017) and pays less attention to the internal core competencies (Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundHow Do Intelligent Goods Shape Closed-Loop Systems?
Rajala, R., Hakanen, E., Mattila, J., Seppälä, T., & Westerlund, M. (2018) · California Management Review · doi:10.1177/0008125618759685 · Cited by 118
Tavalaei, M. M., & Cennamo, C. (2021) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2020.101994 · Cited by 101
Complementors as connectors: managing open innovation around digital product platforms
Hilbolling, S., Berends, H., Deken, F., & Tuertscher, P. (2019) · R and D Management · doi:10.1111/radm.12371 · Cited by 103
“We pose the following research question: How do platform owners manage open innovation to coordinate the development of diverse complementary products on their digital platform? Based on an in-depth field study of the Philips Hue smart lighting platform, and by drawing on literature on platform ecosystems (e.g., Baldw…”
Ioannou, I., & Demirel, G. (2022) · Journal of Banking and Financial Technology · doi:10.1007/s42786-022-00040-1 · Cited by 120
Meta-organizing firms' capabilities for sustainable innovation: A conceptual framework
Berkowitz, H. A. (2017) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.028 · Cited by 120
Dushnitsky, G., Piva, E., & Rossi‐Lamastra, C. (2020) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3163 · Cited by 100
The Politics of Platform Regulation
Gorwa, R. (2024) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197692851.001.0001 · Cited by 106
Supplier strategy in global value chains: shaping governance and profiting from upgrading
Sako, M., & Zylberberg, E. (2019) · Socio-Economic Review · doi:10.1093/ser/mwx049 · Cited by 97
“However, no platform owner can take its architectural leverage for granted, as complementors may compete and challenge its position, as Microsoft did to Netscape, and Facebook to Google (Gawer, 2014; Thomas et al., 2014).”
BackgroundReinecke, J. (2016) · Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) · Cited by 96
A platform ecosystem view of servitization in manufacturing
Kapoor, K. K., Bigdeli, A. Z., Schroeder, A., & Baines, T. S. (2021) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102248 · Cited by 96
The role of digital platforms in e-commerce food supply chain resilience under exogenous disruptions
Suali, A. S., Srai, J. S., & Tsolakis, N. (2024) · Supply Chain Management An International Journal · doi:10.1108/scm-02-2023-0064 · Cited by 95
Complementary components and returns from coordination within ecosystems via standard setting
Miller, C. D., & Toh, P. K. (2020) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3143 · Cited by 94
Zalan, T. (2018) · Review of International Business and Strategy · doi:10.1108/ribs-08-2017-0069 · Cited by 105
“Studies of platforms stress the importance of accumulating a “critical mass” of consumers and producers on a platform (Gawer, 2014): once the inflection point is reached, growth follows an exponential, rather than linear, trajectory, as network effects unfold (Hagiu and Rothman, 2016).”
BackgroundDigital Platform for Circular Economy in AEC Industry
Kovačić, I., Honic, M., & Srećković, M. (2020) · Engineering Project Organization Journal · doi:10.25219/epoj.2020.00107 · Cited by 92
“, 2010); and conceptualised through the organisational perspective, technological platforms are evolving organisations or meta- organisations with a focus on agency and structure (Gawer, 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialMaking sense of the sharing economy: a business model innovation perspective
Sanasi, S., Ghezzi, A., Cavallo, A., & Rangone, A. (2020) · Technology Analysis and Strategic Management · doi:10.1080/09537325.2020.1719058 · Cited by 90
“Startups, thus, enact original reinventions of traditional value architectures through heavy leverage on innovative trends (Hahn, Minola, and Eddleston 2019; Sansone et al. 2019), adopting platform BM con fi gurations to create value through economies of scope in supply and demand (Gawer 2014).”
BackgroundLaczko, P., Hullová, D., Needham, A., Rossiter, A.-M., & Battisti, M. (2018) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.08.010 · Cited by 90
“2009) will allow the central actor to direct its attention towards maintaining a strategic control of the platform (Gawer, 2014; Scholten & Scholten, 2012).”
BackgroundInnovation logics in the digital era: a systemic review of the emerging digital innovation regime
Lyytinen, K. (2021) · Innovation · doi:10.1080/14479338.2021.1938579 · Cited by 98
“The regime expands the notion of a product innovation towards higher abstracted class of product platforms and the concept of product variability (Gawer, 2009, 2014).”
BackgroundSharing economy platform firms and their resource orchestration approaches
Zeng, J., Tavalaei, M. M., & Khan, Z. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.07.054 · Cited by 90
Gig Platforms, Tensions, Alliances and Ecosystems: An Actor-Network Perspective
Kinder, E., Jarrahi, M. H., & Sutherland, W. (2019) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3359314 · Cited by 98
“While others have distinguished between the two concepts of platforms and ecosystems in other research contexts [e.g., 16,48,51], the distinction needs to be integrated in the research on the gig economy to reveal important dynamic of competition and cooperation between various involved…”
BackgroundPluralism in Organizations: Learning from Unconventional Forms of Organizations
Bres, L. P., Raufflet, E., & Boghossian, J. (2017) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/ijmr.12136 · Cited by 99
Global Interfirm Networks: The Division of Entrepreneurial Labor Between MNEs and SMEs
Buckley, P. J., & Prashantham, S. (2015) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2013.0144 · Cited by 91
Unraveling Platform Strategies: A Review from an Organizational Ambidexterity Perspective
Wan, X., Cenamor, J., PARKER, G. G., & Alstyne, M. V. (2017) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su9050734 · Cited by 98
“The core business of a platform owner is to build up its platform capabilities and encourage and facilitate these capabilities on a large scale [8,85].”
BackgroundHow to Develop a Digital Ecosystem – a Practical Framework
Valdez-de-Leon, O. (2019) · Technology Innovation Management Review · doi:10.22215/timreview/1260 · Cited by 86
Luitse, D. M. R. (2024) · Internet Policy Review · doi:10.14763/2024.2.1768 · Cited by 91
Lavikka, R. H., Kallio, J., Casey, T. H., & Airaksinen, M. (2018) · Construction Management and Economics · doi:10.1080/01446193.2018.1476729 · Cited by 86
“In addition to the application of new digital tools to improve data sharing and transparency, digitalization necessitates a change in the business ecosystem, as previous research has shown (Gawer 2014, Porter and Heppelmann 2014).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialThe persistence of platforms: The role of network, platform, and complementor attributes
McIntyre, D., Srinivasan, A., & Chintakananda, A. (2020) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2020.101987 · Cited by 87
Mapping digital innovation: A bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review
Cheng, C., Wang, L., Xie, H.-M., & Yan, L. (2023) · Technological forecasting & social change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122706 · Cited by 78
Köhler, T., & Chesbrough, H. W. (2019) · R and D Management · doi:10.1111/radm.12372 · Cited by 83
Trabucchi, D., & Buganza, T. (2022) · European Journal of Innovation Management · doi:10.1108/ejim-11-2020-0467 · Cited by 83
Logic Pluralism in Mobile Platform Ecosystems: A Study of Indie App Developers on the iOS App Store
Qiu, Y., Gopal, A., & Hann, I.-H. (2015) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2016.0664 · Cited by 88
The Evolution of the Platform Concept: A Systematic Review
Facin, A. L. F., Gomes, L. A. D. V., Spínola, M. D. M., & Salerno, M. S. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2016.2593604 · Cited by 81
“Early studies [7], [10]–[12] primarily discussed the platform concept and benefits companies gain from using platforms to improve the efficiency of new product development, an issue related to the engineering design literature that conceptualizes a platform as a modular technological architecture [3].”
BackgroundWei, F., Feng, N., Yang, S., & Zhao, Q. (2020) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121431 · Cited by 81
Transforming into a platform provider: strategic options for industrial smart service providers
Beverungen, D., Kundisch, D., & Wünderlich, N. V. (2020) · Journal of service management · doi:10.1108/josm-03-2020-0066 · Cited by 81
Clough, D. R., & Wu, A. (2022) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2020.0222 · Cited by 84
“…and behavioral insights that platforms derive from users and complementors accumulate over time, whereas direct and indirect network effects depend on the potential interactions that could take place between users and complementors at any given moment (Gawer, 2014; McIntyre & Srinivasan, 2017).”
BackgroundNevo, D., & Kotlarsky, J. (2020) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2020.101593 · Cited by 80
Xiao, L., Zhang, L., & Cao, J. (2022) · Journal of Engineering and Technology Management · doi:10.1016/j.jengtecman.2023.101738 · Cited by 94
Benitez, G. B., Ghezzi, A., & Frank, A. G. (2023) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2023.108858 · Cited by 82
Tian, J., Vanderstraeten, J., Matthyssens, P., & Lei, S. (2020) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.10.007 · Cited by 82
Transformative governance of innovation ecosystems
Коннола, Т., Eloranta, V., Turunen, T., & Salo, A. A. (2021) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121106 · Cited by 81
“Likewise, Gawer (2014) highlights the role of platform leaders to nurture their ecosystems and Teece (2016) addresses the role of a lead innovator who provides vision and coordinating mechanisms, including common standards for the ecosystem.”
BackgroundStandards and innovation: A review and introduction to the special issue
Blind, K., Kenney, M. F., Leiponen, A. E., & Simcoe, T. S. (2023) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2023.104830 · Cited by 77
Murthy, R. K., & Madhok, A. (2021) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12748 · Cited by 77
Enabling collaboration on digital platforms: a study of digital twins
Reim, W., Andersson, E., & Eckerwall, K. (2022) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2022.2116499 · Cited by 67
“Gawer (2014) further propose that digital platforms can be divided depending on organizational context where the level of openness is a central aspect.”
BackgroundInfluentialStartups in the supply chain ecosystem: an organizing framework and research opportunities
Wagner, S. M. (2021) · International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management · doi:10.1108/ijpdlm-02-2021-0055 · Cited by 75
Competing on freemium: Digital competition with network effects
Boudreau, K. J., Jeppesen, L. B., & Miric, M. (2017) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3366 · Cited by 83
Platform Operations in the Industry 4.0 Era: Recent Advances and the 3As Framework
Siqin, T., Choi, T., Chung, S., & Wen, X. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2021.3138745 · Cited by 77
“In Gawer [31], three types of platforms (i.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialEcosystem management: Past achievements and future promises
Gomes, L. A. D. V., Chaparro, X. A. F., Facin, A. L. F., & Borini, F. M. (2021) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120950 · Cited by 92
Antecedents to Digital Platform Usage in Industry 4.0 by Established Manufacturers
Müller, J. M. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11041121 · Cited by 74
“So far, most academic studies so far almost exclusively examine platforms of non-industrial contexts, neglecting digital platforms in industrial contexts and their potential and challenges respectively [13,14].”
BackgroundNew market development of platform ecosystems: A case study of the Nintendo Wii
Inoue, Y., & Tsujimoto, M. (2017) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.01.017 · Cited by 70
Innovation Ecosystem Research: Emerging Trends and Future Research
Gu, Y., Hu, L., Zhang, H., & Hou, C. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su132011458 · Cited by 89
“Gawer [72] conceptually defined platforms (firm, supply chain, and industry platforms) as “evolving organizations or meta-organizations” with modular and core-periphery structure characteristics.”
BackgroundLeveraging Value Creation to Drive the Growth of B2B Platforms
Anderson, E. G., Lopez, J., & PARKER, G. G. (2021) · Production and Operations Management · doi:10.1111/poms.13866 · Cited by 73
The Chinese platform business group: an alternative to the Silicon Valley model?
Jia, K., & Kenney, M. F. (2021) · Journal of Chinese Governance · doi:10.1080/23812346.2021.1877446 · Cited by 72
Wulf, J., & Blohm, I. (2020) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2019.1705514 · Cited by 80
“[36] Target level of …”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialIn the Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Multi-Level Theory for Supplier Participation on Digital Platforms
Kathuria, A., Karhade, P. P., & Konsynski, B. R. (2020) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2020.1759349 · Cited by 71
“Research has identi fi ed several strategies followed by platform providers to attract suppliers [e.g., 21, 72].”
BackgroundInfluentialMULTISIDED PLATFORMS AND MARKETS: A SURVEY OF THE THEORETICAL LITERATURE
Sanchez-Cartas, J. M., & León, G. (2021) · Journal of Economic Surveys · doi:10.1111/joes.12409 · Cited by 70
An apple a day – how the platform economy impacts value creation in the healthcare market
Gleiß, A., Kohlhagen, M., & Pousttchi, K. (2021) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-021-00467-2 · Cited by 78
“Google, Apple, and Facebook represent this third type par excellence (Gawer 2014).”
BackgroundCross-disciplinary innovations by Taiwanese manufacturing SMEs in the context of Industry 4.0
Chen, C.-L. (2020) · Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management · doi:10.1108/jmtm-08-2019-0301 · Cited by 68
Digital Transformation in Complex Systems
Lakemond, N., Holmberg, G., & Pettersson, A. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2021.3118203 · Cited by 68
“While IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT platform-based approaches were initially explored as internal or supply chain platforms [24] there is an increasing focus on platforms as a new way of organizing within a large network of actors in an organizational ecosystem [22].”
BackgroundData-driven forwarding: a typology of digital platforms for road freight transport management
Heinbach, C., Beinke, J. H., Kammler, F., & Thomas, O. (2022) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-022-00540-4 · Cited by 68
““The economics perspective focuses on how platforms as markets mediate transactions across different customer groups and how network effects fuel platform competition” (Gawer, 2014, p. 1240).”
BackgroundPlatform design and governance in industrial markets: Charting the meta-organizational logic
Springer, V., Randhawa, K., Jovanovic, M., Ritala, P., & Piller, F. T. (2025) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2025.105236 · Cited by 61
Hilbolling, S., Berends, H., Deken, F., & Tuertscher, P. (2021) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.12555 · Cited by 71
“Consequently, open platform ecosystems are multi-sided markets, driven by indirect network effects (Gawer, 2014; Rochet and Tirole, 2003).”
BackgroundInfluentialInnovation, upgrading, and governance in cross-sectoral global value chains: the case of smartphones
Lee, J., & Gereffi, G. (2020) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/dtaa062 · Cited by 67
Business Data Sharing through Data Marketplaces: A Systematic Literature Review
Abbas, A. E., Agahari, W., van de Ven, M., Zuiderwijk, A., & de Reuver, M. (2021) · Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research · doi:10.3390/jtaer16070180 · Cited by 69
Jiao, H., Wang, T., Libaers, D. P., Yang, J.-F., & Hu, L.-S. (2025) · Journal of Innovation & Knowledge · doi:10.1016/j.jik.2024.100638 · Cited by 70
Digital platforms for the co-creation of public value
Meijer, A., & Boon, W. (2021) · Policy & Politics · doi:10.1332/030557321x16115951032181 · Cited by 77
When All Products Are Digital: Complexity and Intangible Value in the Ecosystem of Digitizing Firms
Rahmati, P., Tafti, A., Westland, J. C., & Hidalgo, C. A. (2021) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2021/15384 · Cited by 66
Mukhopadhyay, S., Bouwman, H., & Jaiswal, M. P. (2019) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2019.05.001 · Cited by 71
“Modularity is part of overall platform architectural governance and it is actively managed by the platform leader (Gawer, 2014; O'Reilly, 2010).”
BackgroundInfluential
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
