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
Competition in two-sided markets
Armstrong, M. (2006) · The RAND Journal of Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1756-2171.2006.tb00037.x · Cited by 3,315
Two-sided markets: A progress report
Rochet, J.-C., & Tirole, J. (2006) · The RAND Journal of Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1756-2171.2006.tb00036.x · Cited by 2,994
General purpose technologies ‘Engines of growth’?
Bresnahan, T. F., & Trajtenberg, M. (1995) · Journal of Econometrics · doi:10.1016/0304-4076(94)01598-t · Cited by 2,879
Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2009) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.821 · Cited by 2,831
Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities
Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. (1986) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/261409 · Cited by 2,622
TAKING STOCK OF NETWORKS AND ORGANIZATIONS: A MULTILEVEL PERSPECTIVE.
Brass, D. J., Galaskiewicz, J. J., Greve, H. R., & Tsai, W. (2004) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/20159624 · Cited by 2,611
The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm
Ulrich, K. (2011) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(94)00775-3 · Cited by 2,145 · cited 5×
“…complexity of one of the elements crosses a certain threshold, that complexity can be isolated by defining a separate abstraction that has a simple 4 Ulrich (1995) defines product architecture as “the scheme by which the function of a product is allocated to physical components” (Ulrich, 1995, p.…”
BackgroundInfluentialPowell, W. W., White, D. R., Koput, K. W., & Owen-Smith, J. D. (2005) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/421508 · Cited by 2,042
Towards an economic theory of the multiproduct firm
Teece, D. J. (1982) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/0167-2681(82)90003-8 · Cited by 2,001
Orchestrating Innovation Networks
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2006.21318923 · Cited by 1,803 · cited 1×
“…on platforms to the literature on inter-organizational netork dynamics (Powell et al., 1996, 2005; Uzzi, 1997; Ahuja, 2000; rass et al., 2004; Dhanaraj and Parkhe, 2006; Zaheer et al., 2000) to erive insights on patterns of emergence and evolution of platform cosystems as networks of…”
BackgroundChicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers
Caillaud, B., & Jullien, B. (2003) · The RAND Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/1593720 · Cited by 1,799
Economies of scope and the scope of the enterprise
Teece, D. J. (1980) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/0167-2681(80)90002-5 · Cited by 1,775
Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design
PARKER, G. G., & Alstyne, M. V. (2005) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1050.0400 · Cited by 1,684
(2005) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.42-5360 · Cited by 1,562 · cited 1×
“…(from complementor to competitor for example, or vice versa) and associated shifting patterns of collaboration and competition, are in fact a feature of ecosystems (Iansiti and Levien, 2004), one that ought to be treated explicitly in rigorous attempts to theorize technological platforms.”
BackgroundTiwana, A., Konsynski, B., & Bush, A. A. (2010) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1100.0323 · Cited by 1,514
Toward a General Modular Systems Theory and Its Application to Interfirm Product Modularity
Schilling, M. A. (2000) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2000.3312918 · Cited by 1,511 · cited 1×
“The central tenet of the modularity literature is precisely that modular product architectures facilitate innovation (Langlois and Robertson, 1992; Baldwin and Clark, 2000; Schilling, 2000).”
BackgroundPlatform Leadership How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco Drive Industry Innovation
Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2002) · Cited by 1,486
Modular production networks: a new American model of industrial organization
Sturgeon, T. J. (2002) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/11.3.451 · Cited by 1,399
Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation
Baldwin, C. Y., & von Hippel, E. (2010) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0618 · Cited by 1,318
The Economics of Two-Sided Markets
Rysman, M. (2009) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.23.3.125 · Cited by 1,261
Strategies for Two-Sided Markets
Eisenmann, T. R., PARKER, G. G., & Alstyne, M. V. (2006) · Harvard business review · Cited by 1,175
Hagiu, A., & Wright, J. (2015) · International Journal of Industrial Organization · doi:10.1016/j.ijindorg.2015.03.003 · Cited by 1,152
Organizational Boundaries and Theories of Organization
Santos, F. M. S. D., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2005) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0152 · Cited by 1,074
Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control
Boudreau, K. J. (2010) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1100.1215 · Cited by 984
Platforms, Markets and Innovation
Eisenmann, T. R., Parker, G., & Alstyne, M. V. (2009) · Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks · doi:10.4337/9781849803311 · Cited by 968 · cited 2×
“…are then defined as ‘. . .a building block, providing an essential function to a technological system – which acts as a foundation upon which other firms, loosely organized in an innovation ecosystem, can develop complementary products, technologies or services’ (Gawer, 2009a: 2; Gawer, 2009b: 54).”
BackgroundThe interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution
Clark, K. B. (1985) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(85)90007-1 · Cited by 958
Meta‐organization design: Rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts
Gulati, R., Puranam, P., & Tushman, M. L. (2012) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.1975 · Cited by 951
The Architecture of Platforms: A Unified View
Baldwin, C. Y., & Woodard, C. J. (2009) · Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks · doi:10.4337/9781849803311.00008 · Cited by 941
The power of product platforms : building value and cost leadership
Meyer, M. H., & Lehnerd, A. P. (1997) · Cited by 940
Modularity in technology and organization
Langlois, R. N. (2002) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/s0167-2681(02)00056-2 · Cited by 932
Langlois, R., & Robertson, P. (1992) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(92)90030-8 · Cited by 930
Planning for Product Platforms
Robertson, D., & Ulrich, K. T. (1998) · ScholarlyCommons (University of Pennsylvania) · Cited by 926
Product family design and platform-based product development: a state-of-the-art review
Jiao, J. R., Simpson, T. W., & Siddique, Z. (2007) · Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing · doi:10.1007/s10845-007-0003-2 · Cited by 861 · cited 2×
“Platform design stands out as a common element across this set of organizational contexts (Huang et al., 2005; Simpson et al., 2006; Jiao et al., 2007).”
BackgroundDesign Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity
Hatch, N. W., Baldwin, C. Y., & Clark, K. B. (2001) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259400 · Cited by 839
Eisenmann, T. R., Parker, G., & Van Alstyne, M. W. (2010) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1496336 · Cited by 829
The Architecture of Complexity
Barabási, A.-Ĺ. (2007) · IEEE Control Systems · doi:10.1109/mcs.2007.384127 · Cited by 826
Creating project plans to focus product development.
Wheelwright, S. C., & Clark, K. B. (1992) · PubMed · Cited by 778
Panzar, J. C. (1981) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 741
Boudreau, K. J. (2012) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1110.0678 · Cited by 676 · cited 2×
“…study of mobile andheld platforms, and finds an inverted U-shape relationship etween innovation and opening platform access, consistent with a crowding out” of innovation incentives when competition among omplementors increase beyond a certain level, a hypothesis conrmed in Boudreau (2012).”
BackgroundProduct platform design and customization: Status and promise
Simpson, T. W. (2004) · Artificial intelligence for engineering design analysis and manufacturing · doi:10.1017/s0890060404040028 · Cited by 640 · cited 1×
“…exclusively through pricing Literature • Sanderson and Uzumeri (1995) • Brusoni (2005) • Gawer and Cusumano (2002) • Meyer and Lehnerd (1997) • Zirpoli and Becker (2011) • Baldwin and Woodard (2009) • Simpson (2004) • Sako (2009) • Boudreau (2010) • Eisenmann et al. (2011) n (au pace m 3 o s…”
BackgroundPlatform Owner Entry and Innovation in Complementary Markets: Evidence from Intel
Gawer, A., & Henderson, R. (2007) · Journal of Economics & Management Strategy · doi:10.1111/j.1530-9134.2007.00130.x · Cited by 620 · cited 2×
“Intel for example ook particular care to ensure that its complementors could remain rofitable by refraining to compete directly with them in a number f markets (Gawer and Henderson, 2007).”
BackgroundInter‐temporal economies of scope, organizational modularity, and the dynamics of diversification
Helfat, C. E., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2004) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.427 · Cited by 607
Some Empirical Aspects of Multi-sided Platform Industries
Evans, D. S. (2003) · Review of Network Economics · doi:10.2202/1446-9022.1026 · Cited by 605 · cited 3×
“…value of the platform stems rincipally from the access of “one side” to the “other side” of he platform, the question of platform adoption becomes “how to ring multiple sides on board” (Evans, 2003; Rochet and Tirole, 006) while avoiding the “chicken-and-egg problem” (Caillaud and ullien, 2003).”
BackgroundHow Companies Become Platform Leaders
Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2008) · Open Research (University of Surrey) · Cited by 568
Groysberg, B., McLean, A. N., & Nohria, N. (2006) · PubMed · Cited by 554
Opening Platforms: How, When and Why?Preprint
Eisenmann, T. R., Parker, G. G., & Alstyne, M. W. V. (2008) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1264012 · Cited by 534
Competition Between Networks: A Study of the Market for Yellow Pages
Rysman, M. (2004) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1111/0034-6527.00512 · Cited by 527
Where do transactions come from? Modularity, transactions, and the boundaries of firms
Baldwin, C. Y. (2007) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/dtm036 · Cited by 512
Platform Rules: Multi-Sided Platforms as Regulators
Boudreau, K. J., & Hagiu, A. (2008) · Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks · doi:10.4337/9781849803311.00014 · Cited by 512
Managing product families: The case of the Sony Walkman
Sanderson, S. W., & Uzumeri, M. V. (1995) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(94)00797-b · Cited by 445
Technological and organizational designs for realizing economies of substitution
Garud, R. B., & Kumaraswamy, A. (1995) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250160919 · Cited by 442 · cited 1×
“This facilitates autonomous innovation within modules, as well as mix-and-match innovation through innovative recombination of modules (Garud and Kumaraswamy, 1995).”
BackgroundOrchestration Processes in Network-Centric Innovation: Evidence From the Field.
Nambisan, S., & Sawhney, M. (2011) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2011.63886529 · Cited by 441
Appropriateness and Impact of Platform-Based Product Development
Krishnan, V., & Gupta, S. (2001) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.47.1.52.10665 · Cited by 418 · cited 2×
“…specific kinds of esign choices on product architecture (Ulrich, 1995) that could elp firms generate product families (Sanderson and Uzumeri, 995) and innovate more quickly and systematically by using and e-using common assets (Krishnan and Gupta, 2001) as templates or product innovation.”
BackgroundOrganizations and meta-organizations
Ahrne, G., & Brunsson, N. (2005) · Scandinavian Journal of Management · doi:10.1016/j.scaman.2005.09.005 · Cited by 392 · cited 1×
“Section 3 presents a classication system of three different categories of platforms (within 1 The concept of meta-organization, originally used by Ahrne and Brunsson (2005) o characterize organizations of organizations, was further clarified by Gulati et al. 2012).”
BackgroundInstitutional Work as Logics Shift: The Case of Intel’s Transformation to Platform Leader
Gawer, A., & Phillips, N. (2013) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840613492071 · Cited by 382 · cited 1×
“…innovation in a way that protected complementors’ ncentives helped establish the continued support of an ecosystem f firms whose business models were tied to the new, open ‘Wintel’ Windows + Intel) PC architecture, which had by then become the ndustry platform (Gawer and Phillips, 2013).”
BackgroundA two-sided, empirical model of television advertising and viewing markets
Wilbur, K. C. (2008) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.1070.0303 · Cited by 342
Modularity: Implications for Imitation, Innovation, and Sustained Advantage
Pil, F. K., & Cohen, S. K. (2006) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2006.22528166 · Cited by 328
Invisible Engines: How Software Platforms Drive Innovation and Transform Industries
Evans, D. S., Hagiu, A., & Schmalensee, R. (2006) · Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) · Cited by 311
The Dual Role of Modularity: Innovation and Imitation
Ethiraj, S. K., Levinthal, D. A., & Roy, R. R. (2008) · ScholarlyCommons (University of Pennsylvania) · Cited by 279
Huang, G. Q., Zhang, X., & Liang, L. (2004) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2004.10.014 · Cited by 264
Organizing Ecologies of Complex Innovation
Dougherty, D. J., & Dunne, D. D. (2011) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0605 · Cited by 264
Product Strategy for High Technology Companies
McGrath, M. E. (2000) · Cited by 249
The Limits to Specialization: Problem Solving and Coordination in ‘Modular Networks’
Brusoni, S. (2005) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840605059161 · Cited by 209 · cited 2×
“…relations between supply-chain member organizations • Ecosystem governance ◦ In the special case of multi-sided markets: exclusively through pricing Literature • Sanderson and Uzumeri (1995) • Brusoni (2005) • Gawer and Cusumano (2002) • Meyer and Lehnerd (1997) • Zirpoli and Becker (2011) •…”
BackgroundMacDuffie, J. P. (2013) · Global Strategy Journal · doi:10.1111/j.2042-5805.2012.01048.x · Cited by 195 · cited 1×
“…being shared across firms within supply-chains (Brusoni, 2005; Zirpoli and Becker, 2011; Zirpoli and Caputo, 2002; Brusoni and Prencipe, 2009; Sturgeon, 2002; Doran, 2003; Huang et al., 2005; MacDuffie, 2013; MacDuffie and Helper, 2006; Sako, 2009; Simpson et al., 2006; Tatsumoto et al., 2009).”
Background(2006) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511493249 · Cited by 182
Zirpoli, F., & Becker, M. C. (2010) · R and D Management · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2010.00629.x · Cited by 141 · cited 2×
“…firms, research has also documented how manufacturing platforms were increasingly being shared across firms within supply-chains (Brusoni, 2005; Zirpoli and Becker, 2011; Zirpoli and Caputo, 2002; Brusoni and Prencipe, 2009; Sturgeon, 2002; Doran, 2003; Huang et al., 2005; MacDuffie, 2013;…”
BackgroundThe Firm as a Collaborative Community: Reconstructing Trust in the Knowledge Economy
Peters, J. (2007) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.1177/009430610703600424 · Cited by 122
The nature of buyer‐supplier relationships in co‐design activities
Zirpoli, F., & Caputo, M. (2002) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/01443570210452066 · Cited by 119
Product architecture and platforms: a conceptual framework
Muffatto, M., & Roveda, M. (2002) · International Journal of Technology Management · doi:10.1504/ijtm.2002.003040 · Cited by 116
The economic realities of open standards: black, white, and many shades of gray
West, J. (2006) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511493249.004 · Cited by 113 · cited 1×
“As explained earlier (and as in West, 2007), the concept of open interface is never black and white, and even within ecosystems, there are variations within the spectrum of how open these interfaces are.”
Supply chain implications of modularization
Doran, D. (2003) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/01443570310462785 · Cited by 107
Platforms, Markets and Innovation: An Introduction
Gawer, A. (2009) · Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks · doi:10.4337/9781849803311.00006 · Cited by 99
Markets with Two-Sided PlatformsPreprint
Evans, D. S., & Schmalensee, R. (2008) · SSRN Electronic Journal · Cited by 96
Collaboration in Supply Chains: With and Without Trust
MacDuffie, J. P., & Helper, S. R. (2008) · ScholarlyCommons (University of Pennsylvania) · Cited by 81
Platform-Based Product Family Development
Simpson, T. W., Siddique, Z., & Jiao, J. R. (2006) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/0-387-29197-0_1 · Cited by 72
Dethroning an Established PlatformPreprint
Suárez, F. F. (2012) · SSRN Electronic Journal · Cited by 46
Walled Garden Rivalry: The Creation of Mobile Network EcosystemsPreprint
Hazlett, T. W., Teece, D. J., & Waverman, L. (2011) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1963427 · Cited by 16 · cited 1×
“For example, Apple’s iPhone ecosystem has been described as a “walled garden” (Hazlett et al., 2011), while Google Android’s operating system has been seen as “more open”, and open source software has been seen as a purely open ecosystem.”
BackgroundClark, K. B. (1987) · 研究 技術 計画 · Cited by 15
Tatsumoto, H., Ogawa, K., & Fujimoto, T. (2009) · Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks · doi:10.4337/9781849803311.00022 · Cited by 15
Design Rules for Platform Leaders
Brusoni, S., & Prencipe, A. (2009) · Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks · doi:10.4337/9781849803311.00020 · Cited by 8
Baum (2000) · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200003)21:3
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
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
